Precision Fermentation Proteins Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One assignee holds all 44 records in scope. Every published family in this dataset traces back to a single company, making this less a competitive landscape than a single-filer monopoly map.
- Filings peaked in 2021 at 14, then fell -71% to 2024. The drop from 14 to 4 families is the sharpest signal in the dataset, though 2025-2026 counts are still filling in under normal publication lag.
- Dairy-specific classes dominate over general protein science. A23C dairy products (93.2%) and A23J proteins (86.4%) outweigh C12N microorganism engineering (43.2%), showing claims cluster on end-product form, not host-strain mechanics.
Filing growth compares 2021 (14 records) with 2024 (4) — 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.
A concentrated field built on dairy-analogue claims
Precision fermentation protein patenting, as captured by this search string, is dominated by claims over dairy-like compositions made with recombinant proteins rather than by claims over the microbial chassis that produces them. The record set spans 2015 to the 2026 data cut-off, but almost all activity concentrates in the years around 2021, when filings from the single ranked assignee peaked at 14 in one year. The most-cited records in the set describe cheese and yogurt like compositions, dairy-like compositions, and micelle and micelle-like compositions — all variations on replicating dairy functionality with fermentation-derived proteins rather than claiming a specific organism or production process.
That pattern matters for anyone assessing freedom to operate: the claim density sits on food-format and composition language, while host-organism engineering, titre improvement and purification process classes are comparatively thin. A newcomer's risk is concentrated wherever composition claims overlap with commercial dairy-analogue formats, not wherever a new strain or fermentation process is used.
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
The two views below use the same 44-record denominator throughout: the year-by-year filing count, and the share of records touching each IPC subclass. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, the subclass shares add to well over 100% — that is expected and reflects how densely composition claims overlap with process and microorganism classes.
Peak filing year: 2021, with 14 records
Filings ran to zero before 2018, rose to a peak of 14 in 2021, then declined to 4 by 2024 — a -71% move over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are not yet complete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the apparent tail-off should not be read as the field going quiet.
A23C dairy products leads at 93.2% of the 44 records
A23C (dairy products) and A23J (proteins and food peptides) each cover the large majority of records, at 93.2% and 86.4% respectively. C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) appears in 43.2% of records and C07K (peptides and proteins) in 38.6%, indicating that host-organism and molecular claims exist but are secondary to composition and food-format claims.
Shares are the percentage of the 44 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Precision Fermentation Proteins with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about precision fermentation proteins and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records anchor the dairy-analogue claim space
US20230404098A1 — Dairy-like compositions and related methods
Provided herein are dairy-like compositions and the methods of making the same using one or more recombinant proteins.Filed by New Culture Inc., published 2023-12-21. The claim scope centres on dairy-like compositions built from recombinant protein inputs rather than on the host organism used to produce them.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2020223700A1 | Cheese and yogurt like compositions and related methods | 42 |
| 2 | WO2022098835A1 | Dairy-like compositions and related methods | 25 |
| 3 | WO2022098853A1 | Micelle and micelle-like compositions and related methods | 18 |
| 4 | WO2023023195A1 | Dairy-like compositions and related methods | 11 |
| 5 | US20220174972A1 | Cheese and yogurt like compositions and related methods | 11 |
| 6 | US20230141532A1 | Cheese and yogurt like compositions and related methods | 9 |
| 7 | US20230074278A1 | Dairy-like compositions and related methods | 4 |
| 8 | US11771105B2 | Dairy-like compositions and related methods | 4 |
| 9 | US20230404098A1 | Dairy-like compositions and related methods | 3 |
| 10 | US20240065282A1 | Micelle and micelle-like compositions and related methods | 3 |
Citation counts favour older records inside any searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a measure of current commercial importance.
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 concentration and the decline actually signal
With every one of the 44 records attributed to a single ranked assignee, the standard competitive-landscape questions (who is catching up, where is white space opening between rivals) do not apply in the usual sense. The more useful questions are about claim scope and about what the fall from peak filing means for new entrants.
A single-filer field, not a competitive one
The ranked assignee list returns one company covering all 44 records in scope. For a prospective entrant, this converts the usual question of who is ahead into a narrower one: precisely how broad are that company's composition claims, and where do they leave room for a materially different formulation or process route.
Peak filing has passed, but the picture is incomplete
Filings fell from 14 in 2021 to 4 in 2024. That decline could mean the core composition space is now well covered by existing claims, or that the filer shifted toward trade-secret protection for downstream process steps. 2025-2026 counts are still filling in under normal publication lag and should not be read as confirmation either way.
Host-organism claims trail composition claims
Only 43.2% of the 44 records touch C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering), well behind the 93.2% touching A23C (dairy products). Claim pressure sits heavily on the final food composition and format, leaving host-strain and fermentation-process claims comparatively less crowded.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to precision fermentation proteins, with the prior art for and against each one.
One filer, and the sub-areas it has not claimed
Because the ranked assignee list returns a single company across all 44 records, there is no rival tier to profile. The more actionable view is which technical sub-areas remain thin even under this filer's own portfolio, since those are the openings available to a new entrant working around the core composition claims.
The dominant assignee sets the claim boundary
This assignee's filings, led by the cheese-and-yogurt and micelle-composition families that carry the highest citation counts in the set, define the outer edge of dairy-analogue composition claims. Any new filing in this space should be benchmarked against those specific compositions rather than the field in general.
Latest-year activity has dropped to zero
The leading assignee shows a -100% year-over-year change in the most recent year tracked. Combined with the incomplete 2025-2026 publication window, this reads as a pause rather than a confirmed exit from the space.
Filing is spread across major examining offices
Records were filed across the United States (10), the EPO (9), WIPO/PCT (6), Canada (5), Israel (4) and India (4). That spread suggests the filer sought protection in multiple food-regulation jurisdictions rather than concentrating on one home market.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| New Culture Inc. | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate clearance, a formulation strategy, or investment due diligence.
Map the leader's claims against your formulation
Run the dominant assignee's granted claims, especially the cheese-and-yogurt and micelle-composition families, against your own protein source and target format before committing to a product spec.
Explore claim scope in EurekaCheck the thin classes before assuming white space
Titre improvement, purification methods and edible-oil-fat analogue formats show low record counts here, but a narrow search string can miss adjacent filings under different keywords.
Run a deeper search in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 publication catch-up
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent drop in recent years may reverse as pending applications publish. Revisit the trend once 2025 filings are more complete.
Track filing trends in EurekaCommon questions about precision fermentation protein patents
In this dataset, a single assignee accounts for all 44 published records in scope, making it the sole ranked filer returned by the search. That does not mean no other company works on precision fermentation proteins generally; it reflects the specific search terms used here, which centre on dairy-like compositions, host organisms, titre improvement and related process claims. Anyone assessing the competitive field should treat this as a narrow, composition-focused slice rather than the full universe of fermentation-protein IP.
Filings from the leading assignee peaked at 14 in 2021 and fell to 4 by 2024, a decline of 71% over that span. This could reflect the core composition space becoming well covered by earlier claims, a strategic shift toward trade-secret protection for process steps, or simply normal fluctuation in a small dataset. It is not evidence that the underlying technology has stalled, since publication lags filing by roughly 18 months and 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete.
The large majority of records sit in A23C (dairy products, 93.2%) and A23J (proteins and food peptides, 86.4%), meaning most claims describe finished dairy-analogue compositions rather than the underlying biology. C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) appears in 43.2% of records and C07K (peptides and proteins) in 38.6%, so host-strain and molecular claims exist but are a smaller share of the total. A23G (confectionery and ice cream) and A23D (edible oils and fats) are the thinnest categories tracked.
US20230404098A1 covers dairy-like compositions made using recombinant proteins, filed by New Culture Inc. and published in December 2023. It is a composition-of-matter style filing rather than a claim over a specific microorganism or fermentation process, so its practical reach depends on how closely a new product's formulation matches the claimed compositions. Anyone designing a competing product should read the granted claim set in full rather than relying on the abstract, since the abstract describes the general concept but not the specific limitations that determine actual blocking scope.
Based on the IPC composition in this dataset, host-organism titre improvement, downstream protein purification methods, and applications outside core dairy formats such as confectionery (A23G) and edible oils (A23D) all carry noticeably fewer records than the dominant dairy-composition classes. Regulatory-dossier and functional-equivalence claims also appear thin. These gaps are worth investigating further with a broader search, since a narrow keyword set can under-count adjacent filings that use different terminology for similar technical approaches.
Research Precision Fermentation Proteins in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole precision fermentation proteins 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.