Shale Shaker Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 54.4% concentration. The top 5 assignees hold 279 of 513 records in scope — filing here is dominated by a small set of oilfield equipment makers, not a fragmented field.
- Filing has cooled from its 2020 peak. 23 records published that year against a 2021→2024 decline of -53%, though 2025-26 counts are still filling in under normal publication lag.
- Sieving claims dwarf everything else. B07B sieving & sorting covers 56.3% of the 513 records, more than earth drilling (E21B, 41.5%) and separation processes (B01D, 38.6%) combined coverage suggests.
Filing growth compares 2021 (17 records) with 2024 (8) — 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 513 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This review covers 513 published records matching shale shaker, shaker screen and linear motion shaker terminology combined with functional terms — screen conductance, solids conveyance, screen blinding, deck angle, vibration amplitude and screen panel frame — across filings from 2015 through mid-2026. The scope is deliberately narrow: it captures the mechanical and materials claims around vibrating screen separation equipment used in drilling solids control, not the broader drilling-fluids or rig-automation literature.
Records span multiple jurisdictions, with the United States, Canada, WIPO/PCT, Europe and the United Kingdom all represented as receiving offices, reflecting the international footprint of oilfield service equipment makers rather than a single-market technology.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 513 records: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend: a 2020 peak, then a pullback
Filings rose from 7 in 2017 to a peak of 23 in 2020, then declined; the 2021-to-2024 span shows a -53% drop (17 to 8), a period long enough to be read past the 18-month publication lag. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as a continued decline.
Sieving and drilling classes dominate
B07B (sieving & sorting) appears on 56.3% of the 513 records, ahead of E21B (earth & rock drilling, 41.5%) and B01D (separation processes, 38.6%). Smaller shares in C09K, G06T, B05D, B21F and G01N mark adjacent materials, imaging, coating and testing work layered onto the core screen mechanics — each under 7% of records and each a narrower filing target.
Shares are the percentage of the 513 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Shale Shakers and Screen Technology with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about shale shakers and screen technology and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this space
RFID and surface acoustic wave tagging of shaker screens (US20100193584A1, M-I L.L.C.)
The filing describes a shaker screen carrying an RFID or surface acoustic wave tag on its frame, read by the shaker to identify the screen and adjust shaker variables automatically. It ties a physical identification layer directly to shaker operating parameters rather than leaving screen tracking to a separate record-keeping system.Filed by M-I L.L.C., published 2010-08-05.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US4809791A | Removal of rock cuttings while drilling utilizing an automatically adjustable shaker system | 173 |
| 2 | US6752700B2 | Raised island abrasive and process of manufacture | 127 |
| 3 | US20060243643A1 | Automatic separator or shaker with electromagnetic vibrator apparatus | 113 |
| 4 | US5626234A | Sifting screen | 90 |
| 5 | US20020061723A1 | Raised island abrasive and process of manufacture | 89 |
| 6 | US20020000399A1 | Screen assemly for vibratory separators | 88 |
| 7 | US7000777B2 | Vibratory separator screens | 80 |
| 8 | US6290068B1 | Shaker screens and methods of use | 80 |
| 9 | US8812236B1 | Method for using particle size analysis in near time or real time to create a proper particle size distributi… | 77 |
| 10 | US20170089153A1 | Shaker control and optimization | 75 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations — read them as a signal of influence on later claim drafting, not as a measure 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 numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once the record set is broken down by concentration, technology class and citation depth.
Filing sits with a small group of equipment makers
279 of the 513 records in scope belong to the five leading assignees, and the top 10 combined reach 70.2% (360 records). That leaves a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants competing for the remaining share, which is the more realistic entry point for a new filer than the crowded core.
Screen mechanics outweigh drilling-system claims
B07B sieving & sorting appears more often than E21B drilling or B01D separation classes, meaning the densest prior art sits in the physical screen and vibration mechanics rather than in how the shaker integrates with the rig. New filings that only touch drilling-system integration face a thinner prior art layer than those touching screen geometry directly.
Activity has pulled back from its 2020 peak
The 2020 peak of 23 records has not been matched since, and the 2021-2024 window shows a documented -53% decline. That is a real three-year trend, not an artefact of publication lag, since 2024 is the last year that can be treated as complete.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to shale shakers and screen technology, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field opens up
The ranking returned by the dataset covers 100 companies scored by record count. It is a full ranking, not a top-50 or top-100 cut.
A single assignee well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 88 records, more than three times the fifth-place count of 29, which signals a company with a broad, defended portfolio across the core screen and shaker mechanics rather than a single flagship design.
A steep drop after the leader
Fifth place holds 29 records and tenth place holds 13 — a fast taper that suggests most of the meaningful competitive filing activity happens inside a narrow band of established oilfield service and equipment companies.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, and the strongest pairs all involve the same leading corporate assignee alongside individual named inventors — a pattern of internal inventor credit rather than cross-company joint filing.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| National Oilwell Varco | 0 | — |
| M-I L.L.C. | 0 | — |
| Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Varco I/P, Inc. | 0 | — |
| United Wire Ltd | 0 | — |
| WILLIAMS J TERRELL | 0 | — |
| Ecolab USA Inc. | 0 | — |
| TUBOSCOPE IP | 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 a filing gap.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on screen mechanics
With B07B sieving claims covering 56.3% of records, any new screen geometry or panel frame design should be checked against the leading assignees' portfolios before drafting.
Search this space in EurekaTrack the leading assignee's recent filings
An 88-record leader with a steep drop to the mid-field is worth monitoring directly for continuation filings and abandoned applications that may signal where its focus is shifting.
Set up assignee tracking in EurekaExplore the smaller IPC branches
Imaging-based screen monitoring (G06T, 4.7%) and coating processes (B05D, 4.1%) carry far fewer records than the core mechanics classes and may offer a cleaner path to a defensible first claim.
Explore white space in EurekaFrequently asked questions
The dataset's ranking of 100 assignees shows a single company well ahead of the field, holding 88 of the 513 records in scope. The top 5 assignees combined account for 279 records, or 54.4% of all records, and the top 10 reach 70.2%. This concentration means most of the defended claim space sits with a handful of established oilfield equipment and services companies rather than being spread evenly across the industry.
Filing peaked in 2020 at 23 records and has declined since, with a documented -53% change between 2021 (17 records) and 2024 (8 records). That 2021-2024 window is the most reliable trend because 2024 is the last year publication lag has largely caught up with; 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence of a continued drop.
The dominant IPC subclass is B07B (sieving & sorting), present on 56.3% of the 513 records, followed by E21B (earth & rock drilling wells) at 41.5% and B01D (separation processes including filtration) at 38.6%. Smaller categories include materials (C09K), image processing (G06T), coatings (B05D), wire working (B21F) and material testing (G01N), each under 7% of records, marking narrower adjacent claim areas layered onto the core screen mechanics.
This M-I L.L.C. filing, published 2010-08-05, claims a method of operating a shaker where the shaker screen carries an RFID or surface acoustic wave tag on its frame; the shaker reads screen information from the tag and adjusts a shaker variable accordingly. It also claims the tagged screen itself, described as a filtering element on a frame with outer frame members, cross members and the identification tag. Anyone building screen-life tracking or condition monitoring into a shaker system should review this filing's specific claim language on tag placement and the read-and-adjust method step.
Based on IPC composition, the smaller shares in G06T (image processing, 4.7%), B05D (coatings, 4.1%) and B21F (wire working, 3.5%) suggest lighter claim density than the core B07B sieving and E21B drilling classes. These branches — image-based blinding detection, panel frame coatings and wire mesh conveyance geometry — carry far fewer of the 513 records and are worth a closer freedom-to-operate look before assuming the space is genuinely open, since low IPC share reflects filing volume, not legal clearance.
Research Shale Shakers and Screen Technology in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole shale shakers and screen technology 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.