Seismic Isolation Bearings Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Filing peaked in 2021 at 16 records and had fallen to 2 by 2024, an 88% drop over that three-year span — though 2025-26 figures are still filling in due to publication lag.
- One filer holds 46 of 144 records while the ranked field runs 69 companies deep, with the top 5 covering 59.7% and the top 10 covering 73.6% of all records in scope.
- E04H specialised structures dominates at 77.1% of records, but bridge-specific E01D claims sit at just 16.0%, pointing to a structural-engineering bias over infrastructure-specific claim writing.
Filing growth compares 2021 (16 records) with 2024 (2) — 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 144 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families combining seismic isolation bearing mechanisms — lead rubber bearings, friction pendulum systems and related devices — with functional claims around period shift, hysteretic energy dissipation, displacement capacity, temperature dependence, prototype testing or restoring force. The scope spans 2015 through the mid-2026 data cut-off, covering 144 published records.
Records are drawn primarily from filings at the United States, WIPO/PCT, Canada, Japan, China and India receiving offices, giving a view weighted toward jurisdictions with active seismic design codes and cross-border filing strategies.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 144-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran at 9 in 2017 and reached a peak of 16 in 2021, then fell to 2 by 2024 — an 88% decline over that three-year window. 2025 and 2026 figures remain partial because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent years understate actual filing activity rather than confirming a real slowdown.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
E04H (specialised buildings & structures) appears in 77.1% of the 144 records, with F16F (springs & vibration dampers) at 42.4% and E04B (building structures & elements) at 41.7%. Bridge-specific E01D claims cover 16.0% of records, and narrower categories such as F16M supports (11.8%), foundations under E02D (9.7%) and bearings/couplings under F16C (8.3%) round out the picture. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum to more than 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 144 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Seismic Isolation Bearings and Dampers with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about seismic isolation bearings and dampers and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe prior art everyone in this field cites
US5599106A — Ball-in-cone seismic isolation bearing
A seismic isolation bearing for structures consisting of a steel ball sandwiched between two horizontal steel load plates, each with a shallow concave conical recess along a shared vertical axis. Gravity restores the bearing's displacement once external forces are removed, and lateral bearing forces are described as independent of displacement.Filed by Worksafe Technologies; cited 86 times within this corpus, making it one of the most-referenced ball-and-cone isolation designs in scope.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20060174555A1 | Sliding Pendulum Seismic Isolation System | 106 |
| 2 | US6324795B1 | Seismic isolation system between floor and foundation comprising a ball and socket joint and elastic or elast… | 96 |
| 3 | US5599106A | Ball-in-cone seismic isolation bearing | 86 |
| 4 | US20020166296A1 | Directional rolling pendulum seismic isolation systems and roller assembly therefor | 58 |
| 5 | US5867951A | Seismic isolation sliding bearing for structure | 57 |
| 6 | US6725612B2 | Directional rolling pendulum seismic isolation systems and roller assembly therefor | 55 |
| 7 | WO2004007871A2 | Isolation platform | 47 |
| 8 | US5682712A | Steel-rubber seismic isolation bearing | 46 |
| 9 | US20030099413A1 | Seismic isolation bearing | 31 |
| 10 | CN1421582A | 隔震支座 | 30 |
Citation counts are drawn from within the searched corpus and favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence on later claim drafting, not as a measure of current commercial relevance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once family counts, IPC shares and the citation table are read together.
Filing rights sit with a small group
The top 5 assignees account for 59.7% of all 144 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 73.6%. With one filer alone holding 46 records, freedom-to-operate searches in this space should start with that leader's claim scope before assuming open ground.
Activity has cooled from its 2021 peak
Filings hit 16 in 2021 and dropped to 2 by 2024, an 88% decline over that span. That is the last year the trend can be read as complete — 2025 and 2026 are still filling in under the usual ~18-month publication lag, so a genuine recent uptick would not yet be visible in these figures.
Structural-building claims dominate over bridge-specific ones
E04H (specialised buildings & structures) touches 77.1% of records, while E01D (bridges specifically) covers only 16.0%. That gap suggests isolation-device claims are largely written around buildings, leaving bridge-specific mechanical configurations comparatively less crowded.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to seismic isolation bearings and dampers, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where they cluster
The ranked field runs 69 companies deep, but activity is heavily weighted toward a handful of filers, with co-filing patterns pointing to a small circle of frequent collaborators.
One filer sets the boundary for the field
The leading assignee holds 46 of the 144 records in scope, more than five times the fifth-place filer's count of 8. Any new entrant's first move should be checking overlap against this filer's claim families before drafting around related mechanisms.
A long tail of single- and few-filing entrants
Beyond the top 10, which together hold 73.6% of records, filing activity thins quickly toward companies with only a handful of families each. This is typical of a field driven by a few specialist device makers alongside academic and individual inventors.
A small circle of repeat co-filers
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest combination sharing 8 records and two other pairs sharing 5 each. These recurring pairings suggest a tight inventor-and-assignee network rather than broad industry-wide collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Worksafe Technologies | 0 | — |
| Ocado Innovation Limited | 0 | — |
| MORENO GIL A | 0 | — |
| LIANG ZACH | 0 | — |
| LEE GEORGE C | 0 | — |
| KIM JAE KWAN | 0 | — |
| R J WATSON INC | 0 | — |
| NIU TIE CHENG | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures here describe the field as filed; turning that into a filing or design-around strategy takes a closer read of specific claims.
Map claim scope against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 46 of 144 records, a targeted claim-chart comparison against that portfolio will surface overlap faster than a general prior-art search.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTrack the white-space branches
Bridge-specific and temperature-dependence claims sit well below the E04H core; a freedom-to-operate check in those narrower classes can reveal open filing room.
Run a white-space search in EurekaWatch the 2025-26 filings as they publish
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the real trajectory of 2024-2026 activity is still emerging; setting an alert avoids relying on an artificially low recent count.
Set a monitoring alert in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
It is a structured view of published patent families covering devices and methods that decouple a structure's motion from ground shaking, such as lead rubber bearings and friction pendulum systems. This particular landscape covers 144 records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026. It matters because it shows where claim density is heaviest, who holds the largest portfolios, and which technical sub-areas still have room for new filings without running into dense prior art.
Filing activity in this dataset is concentrated: the top 5 assignees together hold 59.7% of the 144 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 73.6%. One assignee alone accounts for 46 records, far ahead of the fifth-place holder's 8. Beyond the top 10, the ranked field extends to 69 companies with a long tail of much smaller filers, including academic institutions and individual inventors.
Filings peaked at 16 in 2021 and fell to 2 by 2024, an 88% decline over that three-year span, which is the most recent period that can be read as complete. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still partial because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. That means the apparent drop in the very latest years should not be read as confirmation of a continuing slowdown until later data fills in.
The most-cited record in this dataset is a sliding pendulum seismic isolation system, followed closely by patents covering ball-and-socket and ball-in-cone isolation mechanisms and directional rolling pendulum systems. These citation counts come from within the searched corpus and reflect long-term influence on how later claims were drafted, not necessarily current commercial dominance, since older patents naturally accumulate more citations over time.
Bridge-specific claims under E01D cover only 16.0% of the 144 records, far below the 77.1% covered by general building-structure claims under E04H, suggesting infrastructure-specific mechanical configurations are comparatively less crowded. Narrower categories such as temperature-dependent restoring force behaviour and prototype testing protocols for displacement capacity also show thinner claim coverage relative to the core bearing mechanisms. These gaps are a reasonable starting point for a freedom-to-operate check before drafting new claims.
Research Seismic Isolation Bearings and Dampers in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole seismic isolation bearings and dampers 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.