Polymer Foaming Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Filing has cooled since a 2021 peak of 55. activity fell to 13 by the latest year, with 2022's 47 marking the point the decline set in — a maturing rather than growing claim landscape.
- C08J dominates at 1,280 of 1,415 records. polymer processing and solution-based foaming absorbs most filing pressure, while B29C shaping and C08L compositions trail well behind.
- Co-assignee activity is thin — only 10 pairs found. most filers work alone rather than in joint ventures, and the strongest pairing appears just six times, suggesting fragmented rather than consortium-driven R&D.
Filing growth compares 2021 (55 records) with 2024 (24) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 1,415 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the polymer foaming patent record actually shows
Polymer foaming and cellular materials patents cluster around three mechanisms: chemical and physical blowing agents, nucleating agents that control cell size distribution, and processing routes such as supercritical CO2 injection that trade density reduction against mechanical property retention. The dataset covers 1,415 patent families filed between 2015 and mid-2026, concentrated overwhelmingly under C08J (polymer processing and solutions), with secondary activity in B29C (shaping of plastics) and C08L (polymer compositions). This is not a young field with headroom everywhere; it is one where the dominant subclass has already absorbed most of the claim pressure.
Filing volume peaked in 2021 and has since declined toward the most recent observed year, though that final year is undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. Receiving-office data shows the United States and the European Patent Office each handling close to 300 filings, with WIPO PCT, Canada and China each in the 130s — a pattern consistent with global filing strategies rather than a single dominant jurisdiction.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the weight of the field's claim space.
A field past its filing peak
Annual filings rose from 28 in 2017 to a peak of 55 in 2021, then declined through 47 in 2022 down to 13 in the most recent year. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the last one to two years understate true filing activity — but the downward trend from 2021 predates that lag effect and reflects a real cooling.
C08J carries the field
C08J (polymer processing and solutions) appears in 1,280 of 1,415 records, dwarfing B29C shaping (509), C08L compositions (450) and C08K additives (243). Layered products (B32B) and addition polymers (C08F) sit at the margins, at 88 and 89 records respectively — signalling where claim density is lightest.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,415 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Polymer Foaming and Cellular Materials with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about polymer foaming and cellular materials and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records anchoring this landscape
Controlled polymer foaming using a hybrid nucleating agent formed from a mineral and an organic nucleating agent (US11104775B2)
Filed by Magris Talc USA, this patent describes dispersing an organic nucleating agent in a dispersing medium, contacting it with a mineral nucleating agent to form a hybrid nucleating agent localized on the mineral's surface, then contacting that hybrid agent with a polymer and foaming agent to produce a polymer foam with a cellular matrix.Granted 2021-08-31 — illustrates how nucleating-agent hybridization claims are being structured against older, single-agent prior art.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6103152A | Articles that include a polymer foam and method for preparing same | 317 |
| 2 | US5338766A | Superabsorbent polymer foam | 246 |
| 3 | US5116881A | Polypropylene foam sheets | 217 |
| 4 | US5328935A | Method of makig a superabsorbent polymer foam | 198 |
| 5 | US4424287A | Polymer foam process | 181 |
| 6 | US5340840A | Foam structures of ethylenic polymer material having enhanced toughness and elasticity and process for making | 176 |
| 7 | WO1994022502A1 | Superabsorbent polymer foam | 168 |
| 8 | US5180751A | Polypropylene foam sheets | 133 |
| 9 | US6593384B2 | Polymer foam processing with low blowing agent levels | 128 |
| 10 | WO2000006637A1 | Articles that include a polymer foam and method for preparing same | 122 |
Citation counts favour older records simply by virtue of longer exposure; treat them as a measure of influence on subsequent filers, not as a signal 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 implies for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the noise of raw counts is set aside: where citation weight sits, where recent activity has actually gone, and where joint filing is nearly absent.
Old foundational patents still anchor the field
The most-cited record, US6103152A, sits at 317 citations — more than any filing from the last decade. Foundational blowing-agent and foam-structure patents from the 1990s and early 2000s continue to define the prior-art baseline that newer nucleating-agent and supercritical-CO2 claims must design around.
Recent-year filing has gone quiet across named assignees
Every tracked assignee in the recent-momentum data shows zero or flat filings in the latest year, with even the most active recording just a single filing. This is consistent with the broader decline from the 2021 peak, though the most recent year is also the most affected by publication lag.
Co-filing is rare and shallow
Only ten co-assignee pairings appear across 1,415 families, and the strongest pairing recurs just six times. Most patent activity in this field is filed by single entities rather than through joint ventures or named-inventor partnerships, which limits how much can be learned from assignee network structure alone.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to polymer foaming and cellular materials, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| PolyOne Corporation | ZAFAR MOHAMMAD | 6 |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | Dow Silicones Corporation | 5 |
| Dow Chemical Company | CHAUDHARY BHARAT I | 4 |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | VO VAN CHAU | 4 |
| PolyOne Corporation | HANDA YASH PAUL | 4 |
| PolyOne Corporation | HANDA Y PAUL | 4 |
| PolyOne Corporation | FRANCIS GARY A | 4 |
| Dow Chemical Company | SUH KYUNG W | 3 |
The strongest co-assignee links pair a corporate filer with a named individual inventor rather than two companies — a pattern more typical of close inventor-employer relationships than formal alliances.
The assignee landscape
Filing here is dispersed rather than dominated by one or two players holding the entire field, with recent-year momentum flat across the assignees tracked.
Eastman Chemical
Eastman Chemical is the only named assignee in the recent-momentum data showing any activity in the latest tracked year, with a single filing and flat year-over-year movement — a marker of continued but modest presence rather than expansion.
Dow Chemical and Dow Silicones
Dow Chemical, Dow Global Technologies and Dow Silicones all register zero filings in the latest tracked year. Their historical presence in the co-assignee pairs (Dow Chemical with named inventor Chaudhary Bharat I, Dow Global Technologies with Dow Silicones) suggests past cross-entity filing within the Dow group rather than current momentum.
PolyOne and named inventor Zafar Mohammad
The pairing of PolyOne (Parkitiv) with named inventor Zafar Mohammad is the strongest co-assignee link in the dataset at six shared filings, well above the next pairing. This points to a concentrated inventor-driven filing program rather than a broad internal team.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Eastman Chemical Company | 1 | 0% |
| Dow Chemical Company | 0 | — |
| Dow Global Technologies LLC | 0 | — |
| PolyOne Corporation | 0 | — |
| Sisos Corporation | 0 | — |
| Moxytek LLC | 0 | — |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company (USA) | 0 | — |
| Honeywell International Inc. | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The landscape here answers what has been filed and by whom. The next layer of work is claim-level: what specific language blocks a given process route, and where a first claim could still be written cleanly.
Map claim scope against your own process route
Cross-reference nucleating-agent and blowing-agent claim language against the specific polymer and foaming-agent combination you intend to use, rather than relying on subclass-level counts alone.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaTrack the under-claimed branches before they fill in
B32B laminates and C08F addition-polymer foams carry the lightest filing density in this dataset; a freedom-to-operate check now, while density is low, is cheaper than one run after the branch fills in.
Set up monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on polymer foaming patents
Filing in this field is dispersed rather than dominated by a single assignee. The dataset of 1,415 patent families shows activity spread across chemicals incumbents such as Dow Chemical, Eastman Chemical, and specialty foam filers like PolyOne, alongside academic and individual inventors. Co-assignee pairings are rare — only ten pairs appear across the whole corpus — which means network analysis alone won't identify a dominant leader; ranking tables by family count are the more reliable read.
Filing peaked in 2021 at 55 families and has declined since, dropping through 47 in 2022 to 13 in the most recent tracked year. Some of that recent drop reflects publication lag, since patent filings typically take around 18 months to publish, but the decline from the 2021 peak predates that lag window and looks like a genuine cooling rather than a reporting artifact. This suggests the core claim space around blowing agents and nucleating agents is increasingly occupied rather than actively expanding.
The search corpus specifically tracks physical blowing agents alongside supercritical CO2 processing and nucleating agents, reflecting an industry shift toward physical foaming routes that avoid chemical decomposition byproducts. Claims in this space typically specify the blowing agent type, the nucleating agent (mineral, organic, or hybrid), and the resulting cell size distribution or density reduction achieved. The representative patent in this landscape, US11104775B2, illustrates a hybrid mineral-organic nucleating agent approach designed to sit apart from older single-agent claims.
The IPC composition data points to B32B (layered products and laminates) and C08F (vinyl and other addition polymer foams) as the lightest-filed branches, at 88 and 89 records respectively against 1,280 for the dominant C08J processing subclass. This does not mean these areas are unpatented, but that claim density is comparatively low, which typically means more room to file a clean first claim without colliding with dense prior art. Confirming this requires a claim-level search beyond subclass counts, since IPC density is a proxy, not a guarantee.
US11104775B2, assigned to Magris Talc USA and granted in 2021, claims a process for producing polymer foams using a hybrid nucleating agent — an organic nucleating agent dispersed and then localized on the surface of a mineral nucleating agent, which is then combined with a polymer and foaming agent. The claim scope centers on the hybrid formation step and the resulting cellular matrix composition, not on blowing agents or foaming equipment generally. Anyone working with mineral-organic nucleating agent combinations for polymer foaming should review this patent's specific process steps before finalizing a formulation.
Research Polymer Foaming and Cellular Materials in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole polymer foaming and cellular materials 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.