Spray Drying Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Filings have cooled since the 2021 peak. 99 families in 2021 against 66 in 2017 and a partial 15 in 2026 — the claim rush already happened.
- Pharma dominates the IPC mix. A61K medicinal preparations account for 1,628 of 2,263 families, more than three times the next largest subclass.
- The most-cited prior art is two decades old. The top-cited record, US6395300B1 on porous drug matrices, carries 664 citations and still frames how later filings are read.
Filing growth compares 2021 (99 records) with 2024 (56) — 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 2,263 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the spray drying patent record actually covers
Spray drying shows up across three very different patent bodies at once: pharmaceutical formulation (A61K, A61P), food processing (A23L, A23P), and the mechanical separation and drying equipment itself (B01D, F26B, B01J). A search built around droplet size distribution, outlet temperature, wall deposition, particle morphology and residual moisture pulls in 2,263 families dating back to 2017, with the United States, the EPO and the PCT route carrying the largest shares of receiving-office activity.
That spread matters for freedom-to-operate work: a formulation claim on an inhalable dry powder and a mechanical claim on a secondary drying chamber can both cite the same droplet-size language without conflicting, because the governing IPC classes and the underlying utility are different. Reading this landscape by subclass, not just by assignee, is the fastest way to see which fight you are actually walking into.
Filing trend and technology composition
Publication counts for the most recent year are always understated, since patent offices typically publish 18 months after filing. Read the final year as a floor, not a ceiling.
A peak in 2021, then a pullback
Filings rose from 66 in 2017 to a peak of 99 in 2021, then eased — the 2022 midpoint of 39 sits well below peak, and the partial 2026 count of 15 continues that decline once the publication lag is accounted for. This is a mature claim space rather than a growing one.
Medicinal preparations lead by a wide margin
A61K alone accounts for 1,628 of 2,263 records, more than the next three subclasses combined. B01D (595), A23L (497) and A61P (423) form a second tier, with equipment-specific classes F26B (265) and B01J (305) smaller but still substantial — evidence that spray drying claims are drafted mostly around what the powder is for, not just how the dryer works.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,263 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Spray Drying Technology with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about spray drying technology and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe prior art that still gets cited
Spray drying apparatus and methods of use (US20010027614A1)
The filing describes a spray drying system that adds a secondary drying apparatus — tubing sized to extend gas-droplet contact time — downstream of the primary drying chamber, raising drying efficiency without raising drying temperature or losing yield.Filed by GATX Ventures, Inc.; published 2001-10-11.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6395300B1 | Porous drug matrices and methods of manufacture thereof | 664 |
| 2 | US6932983B1 | Porous drug matrices and methods of manufacture thereof | 581 |
| 3 | US6582728B1 | Spray drying of macromolecules to produce inhaleable dry powders | 435 |
| 4 | US3971852A | Process of encapsulating an oil and product produced thereby | 405 |
| 5 | US6565885B1 | Methods of spray drying pharmaceutical compositions | 391 |
| 6 | US6001336A | Processes for spray drying aqueous suspensions of hydrophobic drugs and compositions thereof | 352 |
| 7 | US6645528B1 | Porous drug matrices and methods of manufacture thereof | 346 |
| 8 | US5976574A | Processes for spray drying hydrophobic drugs in organic solvent suspensions | 309 |
| 9 | US6077543A | Systems and processes for spray drying hydrophobic drugs with hydrophilic excipients | 283 |
| 10 | US5985248A | Processes for spray drying solutions of hydrophobic drugs and compositions thereof | 282 |
Citation counts favour older filings by construction — a highly cited 2001-era patent signals influence on how later claims were drafted, not that the technology is still the leading edge.
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 filing pattern signals
Three things stand out once the data is read family-by-family rather than document-by-document.
The rush already happened
Filings peaked in 2021 and have declined since, with the 2022 midpoint of 39 already well under half the peak. New entrants are filing into a claim space that has been worked over for close to a decade, which raises the bar for a clean novel claim in the core droplet-formation and drying-chamber mechanics.
Formulation, not equipment, drives volume
Medicinal preparations under A61K make up nearly three-quarters of the corpus. Equipment-centric drying classes (F26B, B01J) are present but comparatively thin, suggesting mechanical dryer design has less recent claim pressure than the formulations processed through it.
Old porous-matrix patents still anchor drafting
The most-cited record, US6395300B1 on porous drug matrices, and its continuation US6932983B1, together carry over 1,200 citations. Both predate most of the filings in this corpus, so examiners and drafters alike are still working against art set two decades ago.
Co-filing is limited and concentrated
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear across the corpus, and the strongest links repeat around a small number of inventor-assignee combinations tied to inhalation-therapy filings. Most activity in this space is filed by a single assignee rather than through joint ventures.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to spray drying technology, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee activity and where it has stalled
Recent-year momentum figures point to a landscape where several previously active filers have gone quiet rather than accelerated.
Several established filers show no recent activity
A number of assignees active earlier in the window — spanning pharmaceutical formulation and inhalation-therapy filers — show zero families in the latest year, including one with a documented -100% year-on-year change. That pattern is consistent with the broader post-2021 decline rather than isolated to any one company.
A long tail behind the leaders
With the ranking spread across the full corpus and co-filing rare, the field reads as a leader-plus-long-tail structure typical of a technology that has moved from formation to consolidation: a handful of assignees hold dense filing histories while most others appear a handful of times.
US, EPO and PCT carry most of the volume
The United States (506), European Patent Office (338) and WIPO/PCT route (224) account for the bulk of receiving-office activity, with Australia, Canada and India each in the 130-180 range — a filing footprint consistent with pharmaceutical and food-processing companies protecting core markets plus a PCT-first strategy before national phase entry.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Aragon Pharmaceuticals | 0 | — |
| Acusphere, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Inhale Therapeutic Systems, Inc. | 0 | — |
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG | 0 | — |
| Evonik Operations GmbH | 0 | — |
| Vertical Pharmaceuticals | 0 | -100% |
| Horizon Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Sabo Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The filing and citation patterns above set up three concrete next steps for a team deciding where to file or challenge.
Map claims against the top-cited prior art
Before drafting in the porous-matrix or inhalable-powder space, check new claim language against the citation cluster anchored by US6395300B1 and its continuation — those patents still shape how examiners read novelty here.
Explore citation trees in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches
Wall-deposition mitigation and real-time morphology feedback sit in the corpus's thinner IPC classes; a freedom-to-operate check there is cheaper than in the crowded A61K core.
Run a white space search in EurekaWatch assignees that have gone quiet
Several assignees with earlier filing activity show zero families in the latest year. That can mean a licensing shift, an acquisition, or a pivot away from spray drying — worth confirming before assuming the claim space is undefended.
Track assignee activity in EurekaCommon questions about spray drying patents
The tracked corpus contains 2,263 patent families published between 2017 and mid-2026, built from a search combining spray drying terminology with technical claim language around droplet size distribution, outlet temperature, wall deposition, particle morphology and residual moisture. Families are the fairer unit to cite than raw document counts because they neutralise repeat filings of the same invention across jurisdictions. The true figure for the most recent year is understated because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
It is slowing. Filings rose from 66 families in 2017 to a peak of 99 in 2021, then declined — the 2022 count of 39 is already less than half the peak, and the partial 2026 figure of 15 continues that trajectory even after allowing for publication lag. This points to a technology that has moved past its most active filing period rather than one still accelerating.
Pharmaceutical formulation dominates by a wide margin. Medicinal preparations under IPC class A61K account for 1,628 of the 2,263 families in this corpus, well ahead of separation processes (B01D, 595), food and beverages (A23L, 497) and therapeutic activity claims (A61P, 423). Equipment-focused classes like F26B (drying) and B01J (catalysis and physical processes) are present but comparatively thin, indicating most recent claim activity centres on what is being dried rather than the dryer mechanics themselves.
US20010027614A1, assigned to GATX Ventures, Inc. and published in 2001, describes a spray drying system that adds a secondary drying apparatus with tubing sized to extend gas-droplet contact time downstream of the primary drying chamber. Its stated effect is raising drying efficiency without raising temperature or losing yield. Whether it blocks a specific new filing depends on claim scope and jurisdiction status, so a design that avoids extended-tubing secondary-stage architecture, or that operates outside its claimed configuration, is the practical way to work around it rather than assuming blanket exclusion.
The smaller IPC classes in this corpus — F26B (drying, 265 records), B01J (305) and C08J (polymer processing, 97) — carry far less filing density than the A61K core, and sub-areas like wall-deposition mitigation for sticky powders, real-time particle morphology feedback and low-temperature outlet control for heat-sensitive actives show up less often near the most-cited prior art. That combination of low density and distance from heavily cited claims is a reasonable signal of open claim space, though it should be confirmed with a targeted freedom-to-operate search before filing.
The assignee ranking spans the full 2,263-family corpus with a small number of dense filers and a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants, a structure typical of a technology past its formation phase. Several previously active assignees, including firms tied to inhalation-therapy filings, show zero families in the most recent year, with at least one recording a -100% year-on-year change. That does not necessarily mean abandonment — it can also reflect licensing changes or acquisition — but it is worth verifying before treating any single assignee's portfolio as actively defended.
Research Spray Drying Technology in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole spray drying 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.