Silicone Elastomer Molding Process Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Filing has fallen from a 2018 peak of 963 to single digits in the partial 2026 year, with the midpoint 2022 count of 645 confirming a sustained decline rather than a one-year dip.
- The largest active filer, Nike, still dropped 93% year-on-year, while Shin-Etsu, Acushnet, 3M Innovative Properties, SABIC and Dow Corning-related entities all recorded zero filings in the latest year.
- C08L polymer compositions account for 6,088 records, roughly double the next IPC subclass, showing claim density concentrates in formulation chemistry rather than in the molding process steps themselves.
Filing growth compares 2021 (751 records) with 2024 (402) — 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 30,976 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this patent set covers
This landscape tracks patent families at the intersection of silicone elastomer chemistry (silicone rubber, polysiloxane) and molding process claims: liquid silicone injection molding, compression molding and LSR-specific tooling. The corpus spans 30,976 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, with the most recent year necessarily incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
Coverage skews heavily toward the United States (10,351 records) and Europe via the EPO (5,381), with WIPO PCT filings, Canada, Australia and Singapore forming a smaller but still meaningful secondary tier. The IPC mix shows the technology is claimed less as a discrete molding method and more as an extension of polymer formulation and additive work, with shaping-of-plastics (B29C) and layered-product (B32B) classes sitting well behind the polymer-composition classes in volume.
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 dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how records split across IPC subclasses. Both point to a field where the process itself is settled and the remaining activity concentrates in material formulation.
A decade of contraction
Annual filings ran at 897 in 2017 and peaked the following year at 963 before declining steadily; by the 2022 midpoint the count had fallen to 645, and the partial 2026 figure of 22 confirms the trend has not reversed. Because publication lags filing, the last one to two years will always look lower than they eventually settle, but the multi-year slope here predates that lag effect.
Where the claims sit
C08L (polymer compositions) leads with 6,088 records, followed by C08K (additives) at 3,837 and C08G (condensation polymers) at 2,413. The process-specific classes — B29C shaping of plastics at 2,228 and B32B laminates at 1,754 — are present but secondary, and A61F implants at 1,448 signals a meaningful medical-device filing population layered onto the base chemistry.
Shares are the percentage of the 30,976 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Silicone Elastomer Molding Process with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about silicone elastomer molding process and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative silicone elastomer patent
Thermoconductive silicone elastomer, thermoconductive silicone elastomer composition and thermoconductive medium
The patent covers a thermoconductive silicone elastomer formed from a hydrosilation-curable organopolysiloxane composition combined with reinforcing fine powder silica, a thermoconductive inorganic powder, and a non-reactive organopolysiloxane liquid at room temperature, all dispersed within the cured elastomer body.Filed by Dow Toray Co., Ltd.; published 2011-08-16 as US7999033B2.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2004073778A1 | Nasal assembly | 1,665 |
| 2 | US7331340B2 | Medicament dispensing device with a display indicative of the state of an internal medicament reservoir | 1,646 |
| 3 | US7235302B2 | Fluoropolymer bonding composition and method | 1,475 |
| 4 | US3608549A | Method of administering drugs and capsule therefor | 1,379 |
| 5 | US8273404B2 | Extraction of solvents from drug containing polymer reservoirs | 1,351 |
| 6 | US6999821B2 | Body implantable lead including one or more conductive polymer electrodes and methods for fabricating same | 1,009 |
| 7 | US8801801B2 | At least partially resorbable reticulated elastomeric matrix elements and methods of making same | 957 |
| 8 | US9050176B2 | At least partially resorbable reticulated elastomeric matrix elements and methods of making same | 944 |
| 9 | US20070198022A1 | Patient Selectable Joint Arthroplasty Devices and Surgical Tools | 898 |
| 10 | US5055039A | Orthodontic positioner and methods of making and using same | 881 |
Citation counts favour older records still active in a searched corpus; treat them as a signal of influence rather than of current filing 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 a filing decision
The trend and the IPC split together suggest a field past its filing peak, with remaining claim activity migrating toward formulation and application-specific composites rather than the core molding step.
Decline predates the publication lag
The drop from 963 filings in 2018 to 645 by 2022, well before the most recent incomplete years, indicates a genuine slowdown rather than an artefact of reporting delay. New entrants filing core LSR or compression-molding process claims now compete for a shrinking annual pool.
Formulation, not process, is the dense zone
C08L outnumbers the next subclass by more than 2,000 records, meaning most active claim space sits in additive packages and cure chemistries rather than the mechanical molding sequence itself.
US filing dominates but PCT tier is thin
The gap between US filings and WIPO PCT filings suggests many applicants pursue US and EPO protection directly rather than routing through PCT, which narrows the pool of families with broad multi-jurisdiction coverage.
Even the top filer is pulling back
Nike's filings fell 93% year-on-year while Shin-Etsu, Acushnet, 3M Innovative Properties, SABIC and Dow Corning-linked entities each recorded zero filings in the latest year, pointing to a maturing rather than expanding assignee base.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to silicone elastomer molding process, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is still filing, and who has stopped
Co-assignee pairings and single-year momentum tell a more current story than cumulative rankings. Only ten co-assignee pairs exist in this corpus, and the strongest of them is a single applicant family rather than a cross-company alliance.
Internal entity pairing dominates co-filing
The strongest co-assignee link in the dataset is between Nike and its own innovation partnership entity at 103 shared filings, reflecting corporate structuring rather than external collaboration.
Cross-border materials tie-up
Dow Silicones and Dow Corning Toray share 35 filings, the largest cross-entity pairing in the set, consistent with a joint materials development relationship between US and Japanese operations.
A wide stall across historically active filers
Five of the assignees tracked for recent-year momentum recorded zero filings in the latest year, several down 100% year-on-year, indicating the historically active base has largely paused rather than one firm exiting alone.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Nike, Inc. | 3 | -93% |
| Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd. | 0 | -100% |
| Acushnet Company | 0 | — |
| 3M Innovative Properties Company | 0 | — |
| SABIC Global Technologies B.V. | 0 | — |
| Dow Silicones Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Nike Innovate C.V. | 0 | -100% |
| SABIC Innovative Plastics IP B.V. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next questions rather than a single conclusion. These are the ones worth running down before committing filing budget.
Check formulation claims before process claims
Given C08L and C08K dominate the IPC split, a freedom-to-operate check should start with additive and cure-chemistry claims rather than assuming the molding process itself is the constrained area.
Explore formulation claim space in EurekaVerify current status of stalled filers
Several major historical assignees show zero filings in the latest year; confirming whether this reflects portfolio consolidation, expiry, or a pause is worth a targeted assignee search before assuming the space is open.
Run an assignee status check in EurekaMap the thin PCT layer against target markets
With WIPO PCT filings well below direct US and EPO counts, applicants targeting protection beyond those two jurisdictions should map family coverage market by market rather than assuming PCT-routed protection exists.
Map family coverage in EurekaCommon questions on silicone elastomer molding patents
Filing volume peaked at 963 in 2018 and had fallen to 645 by the 2022 midpoint, with the partial 2026 figure of 22 confirming the trend has continued rather than reversed. This pattern is typical of a technology area where the core process claims have already been staked out and remaining innovation shifts into adjacent formulation work. It does not mean the underlying manufacturing technique has become less commercially important, only that the rate of new patent claims on it has slowed.
Nike is the most active filer in the most recent tracked year, though even its filings fell 93% year-on-year. Several historically prominent assignees, including Shin-Etsu, Acushnet, 3M Innovative Properties, SABIC and Dow Silicones-linked entities, recorded zero filings in the latest year. A practitioner should treat cumulative rankings and recent-year momentum as separate questions, since a large historical portfolio does not imply current filing activity.
The IPC composition suggests the molding process classes, B29C shaping of plastics at 2,228 records and B32B laminates at 1,754, carry meaningfully less claim density than the polymer-composition classes like C08L at 6,088. That gap implies the mechanical process steps are less densely claimed than the material formulations run through them, which is where a freedom-to-operate search should focus first. Specific sub-areas such as multi-shot overmolding tooling or cure-cycle control for low-durometer parts appear comparatively under-claimed relative to the core chemistry classes.
US7999033B2, assigned to Dow Toray and published in 2011, claims a thermoconductive silicone elastomer built from a hydrosilation-curable organopolysiloxane composition combined with reinforcing silica, a thermoconductive inorganic powder, and a non-reactive organopolysiloxane liquid at room temperature. Anyone formulating a thermally conductive cured silicone elastomer using that specific combination of components should review its claims closely, since the composition and its curing composition are both claimed. It does not, on its own, block silicone elastomer molding generally, only the specific thermoconductive formulation and composition route it describes.
Based on IPC volume relative to the dominant formulation classes, thinner areas include multi-shot LSR and thermoplastic overmolding tooling, cure-cycle control for low-durometer compression molding, dispersion uniformity for thermoconductive fillers, and medical-grade LSR formulations stable through sterilization. These are read from where filing density is comparatively lower, not from an absence of prior art, so any filing there still needs a standard novelty search against the existing C08L and C08K base. The A61F implant class at 1,448 records also suggests medical-device-specific silicone elastomer applications remain an active but not saturated area.
Research Silicone Elastomer Molding Process in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole silicone elastomer molding process 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.