Resource Recovery Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- 35.1% of all 424 records sit with just five assignees, so the top of this field is far more concentrated than the 100-company ranked list suggests.
- Filings fell 23% from 2021 to 2024 (47 to 36), the last span the data treats as complete once publication lag is accounted for.
- C22B metal extraction leads at 26.2% of records, but B03B wet separation, B07B sieving and B29B plastics prep each sit under 22%, pointing to lighter claim density outside metals.
Filing growth compares 2021 (47 records) with 2024 (36) — 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 424 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape maps 424 published records matching resource recovery and urban mining search terms alongside material separation and recovery-yield language, filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off. The scope spans metal extraction and refining, solid waste disposal, battery recycling, wet and dry separation, crushing and grinding, and adjacent plastics-preparation claims. Family counts, not raw document counts, drive the assignee ranking, which neutralises continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplicates.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend chart will always look lighter than they will eventually be. Treat 2024 as the last complete filing year for growth comparisons, and read 2025-2026 as still filling in rather than as a genuine drop-off.
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 424-record set: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
A 2018 peak of 53 filings, then a slower plateau
Filings ran from 11 in 2017 to a peak of 53 in 2018. The 2021-to-2024 span shows a -23% move, from 47 down to 36, which is the most recent stretch the dataset can treat as settled before publication lag starts understating the count.
Metal extraction leads, but no single class dominates
C22B (metal extraction and refining) tops the composition at 26.2% of the 424 records, followed by B09B solid waste disposal at 24.1% and H01M batteries and cells at 21.7%. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares add up past 100%; B03B wet separation, B02C crushing and grinding, and the smaller E21B, B07B and B29B classes each sit lower, suggesting separation and plastics-recovery claims are comparatively less crowded than metals and battery recycling.
Shares are the percentage of the 424 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Resource Recovery & Urban Mining Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about resource recovery & urban mining patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this corpus
US20120059640A1 — Thermodynamic modeling for optimized recovery in SAGD
One or more computer-readable media include computer-executable instructions to instruct a computing system to receive input as to physical characteristics of a resource recovery system and a resource reservoir; simulate fluid thermodynamics of the system and the reservoir; and output information as to phase composition, for example, in at least one dense phase affected by the resource recovery system. Various other apparatuses, systems, methods, etc., are also disclosed.Filed by Schlumberger Technology Corporation, dated 2012-03-08. Cited 96 times, this record sits among the most-referenced in the corpus and anchors a cluster of Schlumberger-family filings around subsurface resource recovery modeling.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160045841A1 | New and improved system for processing various chemicals and materials | 860 |
| 2 | US4153514A | Pyrolysis process for solid wastes | 251 |
| 3 | WO2014153570A2 | New and improved system for processing various chemicals and materials | 219 |
| 4 | US5649785A | Method of treating solid waste, recovering the constituent materials for recycling and reuse, and producing u… | 103 |
| 5 | US20120059640A1 | Thermodynamic modeling for optimized recovery in sagd | 96 |
| 6 | US5015384A | Anaerobic digestion process | 81 |
| 7 | US20180335538A1 | Resource Production Forecasting | 78 |
| 8 | US5669958A | Methane/nitrogen separation process | 78 |
| 9 | US5964923A | Natural gas treatment train | 72 |
| 10 | US5264640A | Depolymerization method for resource recovery from polymeric wastes | 69 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more years to accumulate references — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current technical 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 data means for strategy
Three read-throughs from the concentration, trend and citation figures above.
The top of the field is tighter than the ranking looks
Five assignees hold 149 of 424 records, 35.1% of everything in scope, while the ranked list runs to 100 companies. That gap between a handful of dense filers and a long tail of single or few-filing entrants is the shape to plan around: contesting claim space head-on against the leaders is different from filing into the tail.
Activity has cooled from its 2018 peak, not collapsed
The 53-filing peak in 2018 was not sustained; by the last complete comparison window, 2021 to 2024, filings dropped from 47 to 36. Recent-year assignee momentum figures show several leading filers at zero or sharply down in the latest year, but with 2025-2026 still filling in under publication lag, that reads as a plateau rather than a verdict on the technology.
Metal extraction and battery recycling carry the claim density
C22B metal extraction and refining, B09B solid waste disposal, and H01M batteries and cells are the three most-claimed classes, each above one-fifth of records. Separation-focused classes such as B03B, B07B and plastics-preparation class B29B sit measurably lower, which is where new entrants may find more room to establish a first position.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to resource recovery & urban mining patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Corporation | 13 |
| LI CYCLE CORP | 1001297676 ONTARIO INC | 12 |
| Schlumberger Corporation | Schlumberger Canada Limited | 6 |
| Schlumberger Corporation | Schlumberger Technology Corporation | 6 |
| Schlumberger Corporation | Geoquest Systems Inc. | 6 |
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | Schlumberger Canada Limited | 6 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Canada Limited | 4 |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | Schlumberger Technology Corporation | 4 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest links are within single corporate families (Schlumberger entities together, and Li Cycle Corp with 1001297676 Ontario Inc), not cross-company joint filings.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked list runs to 100 companies by family count, led by a filer at 48 records with the fifth and tenth positions at 19 and 11 respectively. That drop-off after the leader, then a long, thin tail, is typical of a field where one or two players staked an early claim position and most others followed with a handful of filings each.
One filer sits well clear of the pack
The leading assignee holds 48 records against 19 for the fifth-ranked filer and 11 for tenth. That steep early drop, more than a gentle slope, indicates a single dominant filer rather than a genuinely crowded top tier.
Filing is largely solo, not collaborative
With only 10 co-assignee pairs identified and the strongest ones linking related entities within the same corporate group, most records in this landscape are filed by a single assignee acting alone rather than through joint ventures or research partnerships.
Filing is US-anchored with a strong PCT and EPO presence
The United States receives the most filings at 91, ahead of the European Patent Office at 58 and WIPO/PCT filings at 52. India, China and Australia each carry meaningful but smaller shares, suggesting protection strategies still centre on US and European coverage before regional expansion.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| William Marsh Rice University | 1 | -89% |
| LI CYCLE CORP | 0 | -100% |
| Schlumberger Technology LLC | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Corporation | 0 | — |
| GLOBAL ORGANICS ENERGY | 0 | — |
| Evergreen Global Resources | 0 | — |
| Schlumberger Technology Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| 1001297676 ONTARIO INC | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The figures above describe where the field stands; the next steps depend on whether you're clearing freedom to operate or scoping a filing strategy.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the leader's claim set
With one assignee holding 48 of 424 records, a close read of that portfolio's independent claims is the fastest way to know whether a planned product or process design sits inside or outside their claim scope.
Explore claim scope in EurekaMap the white-space classes before drafting
B07B sieving, B29B plastics preparation and general B03B wet separation carry noticeably lower record shares than metal extraction and battery recycling, which is where a first claim has more room to stand on its own.
Search adjacent IPC classes in EurekaTrack the assignees with recent momentum drops
Several leading filers show sharply reduced or zero filings in the latest year; whether that reflects a genuine pullback or simply publication lag is worth confirming before assuming the space has opened up.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The dataset ranks 100 assignees by patent family count, with the leader holding 48 of the 424 records in scope and the fifth-ranked filer at 19. The top five assignees combined account for 35.1% of all records, and the top ten reach 51.9%, so the field has a clear leader followed by a fairly steep drop into a long tail of smaller filers. This is a family-based ranking, which neutralises continuation filings and duplicate jurisdictional filings, so it reflects distinct inventions rather than raw document volume.
Filings peaked at 53 in 2018 and have not returned to that level since. Looking only at complete filing years, activity moved from 47 in 2021 down to 36 in 2024, a 23% decline over that span. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any chart will understate true activity and should not yet be read as confirming a continued decline.
Metal extraction and refining (IPC class C22B) leads at 26.2% of the 424 records, followed by solid waste disposal (B09B) at 24.1% and batteries, cells and fuel cells (H01M) at 21.7%. Since a single record can carry multiple IPC classifications, these percentages add up to more than 100% and should be read as relative claim density per class rather than an exhaustive split of the field. Wet separation, crushing/grinding, and plastics-preparation classes all sit at lower shares, indicating comparatively less claim congestion there.
Based on IPC composition, classes such as B07B (sieving and sorting), B29B (plastics preparation) and parts of B03B (wet separation) carry noticeably lower record shares than the metal extraction and battery recycling clusters. That does not mean these areas are unclaimed, but claim density is measurably lighter, which typically gives a new filer more room to establish an independent claim position without immediately colliding with an entrenched portfolio. Any filing strategy there should still start with a freedom-to-operate check against the specific assignees active in that sub-area.
Mostly independently. The dataset identifies only 10 co-assignee pairs across all 424 records, and the strongest of these links entities within the same corporate family rather than separate companies partnering on joint research. This suggests that resource recovery and urban mining patenting in this dataset is driven largely by single-assignee R&D programmes rather than cross-company alliances or joint ventures.
Research Resource Recovery & Urban Mining Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole resource recovery & urban mining 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.