Pet Food Extrusion Patents: Who Holds the Core Claims 2026
- Three assignees account for all 14 records in scope, with the leader alone holding 12 — this is a narrow, tightly held field, not a crowded one.
- Filing peaked at 7 records in 2018 and has since tapered toward zero, though the most recent years are understated by publication lag.
- 92.9% of records sit in animal feed (A23K), while adjacent classes like meat/fish processing and dough handling carry only a single record each — a sign of thin, not absent, coverage.
A narrow, concentrated field
Pet food extrusion processing patents in this dataset cover the mechanics of turning raw ingredients into kibble: screw configuration, specific mechanical energy, expansion ratio, die design, starch gelatinization and throughput stability. Fourteen published records match this search across 2015 through the 2026 cut-off, and the assignee ranking behind them contains only three companies — a signal that this is a specialist claim space rather than a broadly contested one.
Most records classify under animal feed (A23K), with a scattering of single-record appearances in food shaping, dough handling, baking, meat and fish processing, and food preservation. The most-cited record in the set, dating to 1985, remains a foundational reference for cooked extruded flour-based products; the more recent, actively cited family concerns dual-extrusion methods for high-meat-content pet food using separated meat slurry streams.
Filing trends and technology composition
Fourteen published records make up this dataset, spanning 2015 through the partial-year cut-off of 2026. The trend and classification breakdowns below use the same denominator throughout: all 14 records in scope.
Filing activity is thin and uneven
Filings peaked at 7 in 2018 and had fallen to 0 by 2026 (a partial year). With fewer than four complete years of data once the roughly 18-month publication lag is accounted for, no growth rate can be reliably stated — treat the recent-year totals as understated rather than as a genuine decline.
Classification concentrates in animal feed, thins out elsewhere
A23K (animal feed) appears in 92.9% of the 14 records in scope, making it the dominant classification by a wide margin. Every other subclass — food preparation machines, food shaping, dough handling, baking, meat and fish processing, food preservation, and general foods — appears in one to three records each, since a single record can carry more than one class.
Shares are the percentage of the 14 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Pet Food Extrusion Processing with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about pet food extrusion processing and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this dataset
Dual extrusion method and apparatus for pet food production using meat slurries
High meat content extruded pet foods and methods of preparation thereof, preferably include initial treatment of a high moisture meat slurry to create a dewatered meat fraction and a liquid fraction. The liquid fraction is directed to an extruder, along with typical dry pet food ingredients, in order to create an extruded intermediate. This intermediate is then mixed with the dewatered meat fraction, and the mixture is then extruded and dried to create a final pet food. The methods may be carried out using separate processing systems each including a mixer, an extruder, and a drying assembly, in order to maximize production rates.Filed by Wenger Manufacturing, this record and its related family members are the most actively cited recent filings in the dataset.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4568550A | Process for preparing a cooked extruded flour-based product | 122 |
| 2 | US20190075822A1 | Method and apparatus for production of high meat content pet foods | 13 |
| 3 | US10736340B1 | Dual extrusion method and apparatus for pet food production using meat slurries | 9 |
| 4 | US20200268020A1 | Dual extrusion method and apparatus for pet food production using meat slurries | 7 |
| 5 | WO2019182630A1 | Method and apparatus for production of high meat content pet foods | 5 |
| 6 | US12256760B2 | Method and apparatus for production of high meat content pet foods | 3 |
| 7 | WO2018081846A1 | "method for manufacturing pet food" | 3 |
| 8 | US20200120955A1 | Method and apparatus for production of high meat content pet foods | 1 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favour older records; they are not a measure of current filing activity.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (8 of 8 rows); 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 filing pattern signals
With only 14 records and three ranked assignees, this dataset describes a specialist niche rather than a broad technology race. The signals below focus on what that concentration means for a company deciding whether to file, license or design around.
All activity sits with three assignees
The top 3 and top 5 combined figures are identical at 100% of the 14 records in scope, because the ranked list itself only contains three companies. There is no long tail of independent filers here to track separately.
Filing has not sustained its 2018 peak
Activity peaked at 7 records in 2018 and declined toward zero by the 2026 cut-off. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, recent years understate true filing activity, so this should be read as a caution flag rather than a confirmed drop-off.
Animal feed dominates; seven other classes are thin
A23K appears in the large majority of records, while food shaping, dough handling, baking, meat/fish processing and food preservation each appear in only one to three records — evidence of narrow claim density outside the core class.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to pet food extrusion processing, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and what is left open
With only three assignees in the ranked list and one holding the large majority of records, this is less a competitive race than a question of licensing or designing around a small number of established filers.
One assignee dominates the ranked list
The leading assignee holds 12 of the 14 records in this dataset, covering the dual-extrusion meat-slurry architecture that is also the most-cited recent filing family.
No long tail to monitor
Top 3 and top 5 combined both equal 100% of the 14 records in scope, because the entire ranked list is three companies. There is no fragmented long tail of small filers to watch separately in this niche.
Recent-year activity has gone quiet
All three ranked assignees show zero filings in the latest year on record. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this likely understates true recent activity rather than confirming the field has gone dormant.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Wenger Manufacturing | 0 | — |
| General Foods Corporation | 0 | — |
| VIP TOPCO PTY LTD | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
This landscape identifies concentration and gaps; turning that into a filing or licensing decision requires reading the underlying claims directly.
Pull the full claim charts
Review the granted claim language of the Wenger Manufacturing dual-extrusion family alongside the foundational 1985 flour-based extrusion patent to map exactly what is blocked versus open.
Open in EurekaTrack the thin IPC branches
Set an alert on meat/fish processing, dough handling and food-shaping classifications to catch new filings before they consolidate into a crowded space.
Set up monitoring in EurekaCommon questions about pet food extrusion patents
This dataset contains 14 published records matching pet food extrusion process claims covering screw configuration, specific mechanical energy, expansion ratio, die design, starch gelatinization or throughput stability, spanning 2015 to the 2026 data cut-off. That is a narrow field compared to broader food-extrusion or animal-feed categories generally. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true count of recently filed applications is understated in any year close to the cut-off.
The assignee ranking for this dataset returns three companies, with the leader holding 12 of the 14 records in scope. That is not a top-50 or top-100 list; it is the entire ranked set the data returns for this search, meaning filing activity in this specific technical niche is concentrated among very few organisations rather than spread widely. Wenger Manufacturing's dual-extrusion meat-slurry family is the most cited and most actively extended within the set.
Single-extrusion processing combines meat and dry ingredients before a single extrusion pass, which is the long-established, heavily cited baseline approach (exemplified by the foundational US4568550A). Dual-extrusion processing, as claimed in the Wenger Manufacturing family including US10736340B1, splits a high-moisture meat slurry into a dewatered meat fraction and a liquid fraction, processes each through separate extrusion and drying trains, then recombines them to raise meat content and throughput. The two approaches sit in different parts of the same claim landscape, and a freedom-to-operate check needs to identify which architecture a given process actually uses.
Several IPC subclasses adjacent to the dominant animal-feed classification carry only one matching record each in this dataset — dough handling machines, baking and doughs, meat and fish processing, and food preservation. That sparsity suggests the specific combination of extrusion mechanics with those adjacent process steps, particularly meat/fish pre-treatment ahead of extrusion, is thinly claimed rather than crowded. Food shaping and die-design claims are also comparatively open relative to the core process claims.
US10736340B1 is held by Wenger Manufacturing and covers a dual extrusion method for high-meat-content pet food: a high-moisture meat slurry is split into a dewatered fraction and a liquid fraction, the liquid fraction is extruded with dry ingredients into an intermediate, and that intermediate is then mixed with the dewatered fraction for a final extrusion and drying step. It has been cited 9 times, with related family members US20190075822A1 (13 citations) and WO2019182630A1 (5 citations) covering closely adjacent apparatus and method claims. Anyone building a high-meat-content extrusion process should check their architecture against this specific dewatered/liquid split rather than assuming general dual-extrusion is blocked.
Research Pet Food Extrusion Processing in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole pet food extrusion processing 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.