Multi-Jet Fusion Interface Engineering Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Filing activity peaked in 2022 at 66 records and has since fallen off sharply, suggesting the core interlayer-bonding claim space filled quickly rather than gradually.
- A single co-filing pair anchors the field Xerox and the National Research Council of Canada appear together on 46 families, the strongest co-assignee link in the dataset by a wide margin.
- Polymer chemistry outweighs hardware in the claim mix C08L, C08K and C08G subclasses combined touch more records than any single hardware-only IPC code, meaning the fight is as much about formulation as about print-head design.
What this landscape covers
Multi-jet fusion (MJF) interface engineering concerns what happens at the boundary between fused powder particles and between printed layers: the mechanisms that determine whether a part delaminates under load or holds together as a monolith. This search pulls 101 patent families published between 2015 and the 2026 cut-off that explicitly address inter-layer bonding, particle fusion interfaces or interlayer adhesion in an MJF or comparable jetting-fusion context. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the apparent drop-off in the most recent year understates real filing activity.
The dataset spans both the print-process side (B33Y, B29C) and the materials side (C08L, C08K, C08G, C09D), which is the first signal worth noting: interface performance in MJF is being claimed as much through polymer additive packages and coating chemistries as through fusing-energy or print-head hardware.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 101 families: when the claims were filed, and which IPC subclasses they sit in.
A sharp rise to a 2022 peak, then decline
Filings were effectively zero in 2017, climbed through the early 2020s, and reached a peak of 66 in 2022 before falling back. A midpoint that sits at the peak year is a flat-to-declining trend, not a plateau — read the last one or two years as undercounted due to publication lag rather than as a genuine collapse in interest.
Materials science outweighs pure process hardware
B33Y (81 records) and B29C (72) confirm this is squarely an additive-manufacturing and plastics-shaping dataset, but the combined weight of C08L, C08K and C08G — polymer compositions, additive packages and condensation polymers — shows that a large share of the claim activity is about what goes into the powder and binder, not just how the printer fuses it. H10N appearing at 51 records, tied to piezoelectric composite work, points to a materials sub-thread worth tracking separately from mainstream polymer MJF.
Shares are the percentage of the 101 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Multi-Jet Fusion Interface Engineering with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about multi-jet fusion interface engineering and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this dataset
Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners with torque, rotation, and full control anchors
Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners with torque, rotation, and full-control anchor divots are provided. An example process generates multiple virtual models of orthodontic treatment based on progressive moduli of elasticity of different materials used to 3D-print a progressive set of aligners, applying modeled forces to anchor divots and teeth across computed treatment stages. One class of aligner has flat occlusal biting surfaces enabling simultaneous treatment of bite correction, temporomandibular joint disorder and related conditions.Filed by REAL 3D POLYMERS LLC, published 2019-12-26.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160256240A1 | Direct 3d-printed orthodontic aligners with torque, rotation, and full control anchors | 152 |
| 2 | US20190388189A1 | Direct 3d-printed orthodontic aligners with torque, rotation, and full control anchors | 64 |
| 3 | US10179035B2 | Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners with torque, rotation, and full control anchors | 49 |
| 4 | US11484390B2 | Direct 3D-printed orthodontic aligners with torque, rotation, and full control anchors | 8 |
| 5 | US20230122929A1 | Piezoelectric composites containing a sacrificial material and use thereof in additive manufacturing | 5 |
| 6 | US20220305719A1 | Piezoelectric composite filaments and use thereof in additive manufacturing | 4 |
| 7 | US20230181350A1 | Dual purpose orthodontic appliance for alignment, bruxism, and sleep apnea with smart sensors and control mod… | 3 |
| 8 | US20240326292A1 | Piezoelectric powder particulates for additive manufacturing and methods associated therewith | 3 |
| 9 | US20240181708A1 | Manufacturing method of three-dimensional fabricated object, and manufacturing device of three-dimensional fa… | 3 |
| 10 | US20230151210A1 | Piezoelectric composites having localized piezoelectric particles and use thereof in additive manufacturing | 2 |
Citation counts inside this corpus favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence on subsequent filers, not as a measure of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the data means for R&D and IP strategy
Three patterns stand out once families are separated from raw document counts and citation age is discounted.
The rush is over, the residue is not
A midpoint year that coincides with the peak means the field grew fast and then contracted rather than settling into steady-state filing. Anyone entering now is filing into occupied claim space on the core inter-layer bonding mechanisms rather than a greenfield area.
One partnership dominates co-filing
Xerox and the National Research Council of Canada co-appear on 46 families, the single strongest link in the co-assignee data by a large margin. That concentration suggests a joint research programme rather than incidental overlap, and it is the first place to check for freedom-to-operate before filing on core fusion-interface mechanisms.
Formulation claims rival process claims
Polymer composition, additive-use and condensation-polymer subclasses together approach the weight of the core additive-manufacturing subclass B33Y. Interface performance is being engineered chemically as often as it is engineered through print parameters.
Momentum reads flat across the board
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum shows zero filings in the latest year, including the lead co-filing pair, which is consistent with the general 2022 peak-and-decline pattern rather than any one company withdrawing from the space.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to multi-jet fusion interface engineering, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is active, and where the gaps sit
Assignee activity is concentrated around a small number of filers, with a long tail of single-family entrants — typical of a field that saw a short, intense filing period rather than sustained investment.
A joint research programme, not incidental overlap
The strength of this single co-assignee pair relative to any other in the dataset points to a sustained collaborative research effort on fusion-interface mechanisms, likely tied to Xerox's jetting-fusion print engine work.
Coatings specialists claim adjacent ground
Assignees with backgrounds in industrial coatings and paints appear against the C09D subclass, filing on surface-treatment approaches to interlayer adhesion rather than on the core fusing process itself.
No assignee shows active recent filing
Every tracked assignee, from the lead pair down to smaller filers, shows zero filings in the most recent year. That is consistent with the broader post-2022 decline and should be read alongside the 18-month publication lag rather than as confirmed withdrawal.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Xerox Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| National Research Council of Canada | 0 | -100% |
| Tiger Coatings GmbH & Co. KG | 0 | — |
| BASF Coatings GmbH | 0 | — |
| Sika Technology AG | 0 | — |
| REAL 3D POLYMERS LLC | 0 | — |
| Covestro (Netherlands) B.V. | 0 | — |
| Konica Minolta, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape points to a field that filled quickly around a small set of core mechanisms. The next steps depend on whether you are clearing a design or looking for open ground.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the lead co-filing pair
Before filing on inter-layer bonding mechanisms, check claim scope held jointly by Xerox and the National Research Council of Canada — the single densest concentration of related claims in this dataset.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaMap the formulation side separately from the process side
Because C08L, C08K and C08G filings rival the core B33Y additive-manufacturing subclass, a formulation-only search will surface prior art that a process-focused search misses.
Build a formulation-focused search in EurekaWatch the piezoelectric composite sub-thread
H10N appearing at 51 records against a mostly-polymer dataset suggests a materials crossover worth tracking on its own timeline rather than folding into general MJF interface work.
Track this sub-area in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
In this landscape, it means a patent family whose claims or description specifically address how particles fuse across layer boundaries in MJF or comparable jetting-fusion processes, including formulation approaches, fusing-energy control and post-process treatments aimed at adhesion. The search combined MJF-specific terms with bonding-specific terms so that general 3D-printing patents without an interface focus are excluded. This produces a tighter set of 101 families rather than the much larger set that would result from searching MJF terms alone.
The filing trend in this dataset rises from near zero to a peak of 66 records in 2022, then declines, which typically indicates that early entrants staked out the core bonding mechanisms during that window and later filers found less unclaimed ground. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent decline after 2022 is partly a data artefact rather than a full stop in R&D. Treat the last one to two years of the trend as understated until later publication catches up.
The strongest signal in the co-assignee data is a pairing between Xerox and the National Research Council of Canada, who co-appear on 46 families — far more than any other combination in this dataset. That level of joint filing points to a sustained collaborative programme rather than a one-off overlap. Anyone assessing freedom to operate on core fusion-interface mechanisms should check this pairing's claim scope first.
The IPC composition suggests both matter, but materials claims carry real weight: C08L (polymer compositions), C08K (polymer additives) and C08G (condensation polymers) combined touch a large share of the 101 families, close to the core additive-manufacturing subclass B33Y itself. That means a search or a design-around limited to print-process and hardware claims will miss a substantial portion of the relevant art. Formulation-side claims, including additive packages and coating treatments, are a parallel track worth searching separately.
Based on subclass density relative to the core bonding claims, thinner areas include piezoelectric composite fusion interfaces, sacrificial-material approaches to interlayer control, and coating-based adhesion promoters specific to MJF rather than general additive manufacturing. These branches show activity but at lower density than the dominant polymer-formulation and print-process claims, which suggests room for narrowly drawn first claims rather than broad ones. Any filing strategy here should still start from a freedom-to-operate check against the dominant co-assignee pair before assuming the space is open.
Research Multi-Jet Fusion Interface Engineering in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole multi-jet fusion interface engineering corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.