Process Systems Engineering Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
- Filing has cooled from its 2020 peak of 961 records, but 2021's 709 fell only to 624 by 2024 — a -12% move over three years, not a collapse.
- The top 5 assignees hold just 9.4% of all 11,407 records in scope, and the top 10 combined reach only 13.8% — this is a fragmented field, not a concentrated one.
- A61K and G01N lead the IPC mix at 20.5% and 9.6% of records, but control-systems class G05B sits at only 6.8%, thinner than the chemistry-heavy classes around it.
Filing growth compares 2021 (709 records) with 2024 (624) — 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 11,407 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the patent record shows
Process systems engineering sits at the intersection of chemical process design, control theory and materials characterisation, and the patent record reflects that mix directly. Records in scope span classes from medicinal preparations and microorganism engineering through to catalysis, material analysis and control and regulating systems — a signal that process optimisation claims are being filed as much by pharma and materials firms as by classic process-control vendors. The dataset covers 11,407 records published between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off, ranked across 100 assignees.
Filing volume peaked in 2020 and has since eased, though publication lag of roughly 18 months means the most recent years are still filling in and should not be read as a firm decline. What stands out more than the trend line is the shape of the field itself: no single filer dominates, and the technology classes that carry the most volume are not the ones most associated with process control in the classic sense.
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 11,407 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 467 in 2017 to a peak of 961 in 2020, then eased to 709 in 2021 and 624 in 2024 — a -12% move over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because of publication lag and should not be read as a continuing drop.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61K (medicinal preparations) leads at 20.5% of the 11,407 records in scope, with G01N (material analysis and testing) and B01J (catalysis and physical processes) each near 9.5%. Because a record can carry more than one IPC class, these shares sum to well over 100% — they describe overlap, not a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 11,407 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Process Systems Engineering Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about process systems engineering patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative filing and the most-cited records
System for Optimizing and Controlling Particle Size Distribution and for Scale-Up of Nanoparticle Production in an Aerosol Flame Reactor
The present invention relates to a system for optimizing and controlling the particle size distribution and scale-up of production of nanoparticle in an aerosol flame reactor. The method provides nanoparticles with desired, optimized and controlled particle size and the specific surface area in aerosol reactors using a simulation tool with programmed instructions. The said simulation tool couples flame dynamics model and particle population balance model.Filed by Tata Consultancy Services, this record ties particle-size control directly to reactor scale-up through a coupled simulation model — a claim structure that sits squarely across the process-design and materials-characterisation classes that dominate this dataset.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7966269B2 | Intelligent human-machine interface | 1,171 |
| 2 | US4215051A | Formation, purification and recovery of phthalic anhydride | 924 |
| 3 | US20160045841A1 | New and improved system for processing various chemicals and materials | 860 |
| 4 | US20140282586A1 | Purposeful computing | 835 |
| 5 | US6391251B1 | Forming structures from CAD solid models | 833 |
| 6 | US5576629A | Plasma monitoring and control method and system | 739 |
| 7 | US20200348662A1 | Platform for facilitating development of intelligence in an industrial internet of things system | 733 |
| 8 | US20210157312A1 | Intelligent vibration digital twin systems and methods for industrial environments | 716 |
| 9 | US20040168627A1 | Atomic layer deposition of oxide film | 657 |
| 10 | US6930059B2 | Method for depositing a nanolaminate film by atomic layer deposition | 629 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus — treat them as a measure of influence on later filings, not 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 filing strategy
Three findings that shape where a new filing is likely to face prior art, and where it is not.
No single filer controls the field
The leading assignee holds 356 records and the top 5 combined reach only 9.4% of the 11,407 records in scope; the top 10 reach 13.8%. That is a long tail of moderate and single-filing entrants rather than a field locked up by a handful of incumbents.
Pharma-adjacent classes outweigh classic process control
Medicinal preparations (A61K) and therapeutic activity (A61P) together carry more filing volume than control and regulating systems (G05B) alone, which sits at 6.8%. Process optimisation language is being used to protect pharmaceutical manufacturing routes as much as industrial control loops.
Volume has eased from its 2020 peak but not collapsed
Filings ran at 709 in 2021 and 624 in 2024, a -12% move over three complete years following the 2020 peak of 961. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures as provisional given the roughly 18-month publication lag.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to process systems engineering patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders span pharmaceutical, industrial-IoT and process-technology firms — a mix that reflects how broadly the search terms cut across sectors rather than a single dominant industry.
The top-ranked assignee holds a modest lead
At 356 records, the leading assignee sits well ahead of fifth place at 121 and tenth at 96 — a real lead, but nowhere near a majority share of the 11,407 records in scope.
Several top-ranked filers show sharply reduced latest-year activity
Multiple assignees in the ranked leaders show latest-year filing counts of 0 or 1, with year-over-year changes as steep as -100%. Given publication lag, this likely mixes real slowdown with filings not yet published rather than confirming an exit.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated in one pairing
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pairing recurs across multiple pairs — a sign that joint filing is the exception here, not the norm, in a field otherwise dominated by single-assignee filings.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Strong Force IOT Portfolio 2016, LLC | 1 | -75% |
| Freeport-McMoRan Inc. | 1 | -96% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Honeywell International Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Acerta Pharma B.V. | 0 | — |
| Strong Force VCN Portfolio 2019, LLC | 0 | -100% |
| Siluria Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio benchmarking or identifying acquisition targets.
Map claim scope against the leading filers
With 100 ranked assignees and no single filer over roughly 3% of records, a freedom-to-operate review needs to check breadth across several mid-tier filers, not just the top name.
Explore assignee claims in Eureka →Track the control-systems class separately from chemistry classes
G05B filings behave differently from the A61K/B01J cluster; separating the two in any competitive tracking avoids conflating pharma process claims with industrial control claims.
Build a custom IPC tracker in Eureka →Revisit 2025-2026 figures once publication catches up
The apparent slowdown in the latest two years is partly a publication-lag artefact; a re-run against this dataset in 6-12 months will give a more reliable read on real momentum.
Set up a monitoring alert in Eureka →Common questions on process systems engineering patents
The dataset covers 11,407 published records between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off. Filing volume peaked in 2020 at 961 records, eased to 709 by 2021, and stood at 624 in 2024, a -12% move over that three-year span. Note that 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years will fill in further over time.
No single company dominates: the leading assignee holds 356 records out of 11,407 in scope, and the top 5 combined reach only 9.4% of all records, with the top 10 reaching 13.8%. The ranked leaders span pharmaceutical companies, industrial-IoT portfolio holders and process-technology vendors, reflecting how the underlying search terms cut across sectors. This is a fragmented field with a long tail of moderate and single-filing entrants rather than one led by a small concentrated group.
Medicinal preparations (A61K) lead at 20.5% of the 11,407 records in scope, followed by material analysis and testing (G01N) at 9.6% and catalysis-related processes (B01J) at 9.4%. Control and regulating systems (G05B), which many would expect to dominate a process-engineering dataset, sits lower at 6.8%. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these percentages overlap and do not sum to 100%.
Based on filing density relative to citation activity, branches like aerosol reactor scale-up control, particle population balance modelling and residence-time distribution optimisation show filing volume without proportionate depth of claims. That does not mean these areas are empty, but that the claim space within them looks less thoroughly staked out than the dominant chemistry-heavy classes. A prospective filer should still run a dedicated search within the specific sub-branch before assuming space is open.
The most-cited record, US7966269B2 on an intelligent human-machine interface, has accumulated 1,171 citations within this corpus, but high citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to be cited. This should be read as a signal of influence on later work, not as evidence that the underlying technology remains the most commercially relevant today. Newer, less-cited filings in adjacent classes may carry equal or greater current relevance.
Research Process Systems Engineering Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole process systems engineering patent landscape 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.