Styrene Production Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Filing has gone quiet. activity peaked at 7 filings in 2017 and had fallen to 0 by the 2022 midpoint, with no recovery through the most recent year.
- One leader, then a long tail. the top-ranked assignee holds 12 records against a field where fifth and tenth place each hold just 1.
- Catalysis and inorganic chemistry classes trail the core route. B01J (catalytic processes) appears on 32.1% of the 28 records and C01B (inorganic compounds) on 28.6%, well behind the 100% carrying a C07C classification.
A mature route with a thin, aging filing record
Ethylbenzene dehydrogenation to styrene is a settled industrial process, and the patent record reflects that: 28 records sit within scope across the 2015–2026 window, concentrated almost entirely under the core organic-chemistry classification. Filing peaked in 2017 at 7 records and has since gone flat, with the 2022 midpoint showing zero filings and no rebound visible through the most recent year in the dataset. That pattern is consistent with a process where the dominant catalyst chemistry — iron-potassium oxide systems — and the core reactor configurations are already well established, leaving later filers to work around narrower claims: energy integration, parallel reactor systems, and combined CO2/oxygen dehydrogenation schemes.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent drop-off in the last one to two years is likely overstated; some recent filings have simply not published yet. Even allowing for that lag, the multi-year plateau before it points to a field where the dominant chemistry and reactor architecture are settled and most new filings are incremental — improving selectivity, energy recovery or reactor throughput rather than proposing a new commercial route.
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
The trend line and the IPC breakdown below are drawn from the same 28-record scope used throughout this page.
Filings by year
Filings rose to a peak of 7 in 2017, then declined toward zero by 2022 and have not recovered through the most recent (partial) year — a pattern more consistent with claim consolidation than with an emerging technology.
IPC subclass distribution
Every record in scope carries a C07C classification (28 of 28), the acyclic/carbocyclic organic chemistry class that covers the styrene and ethylbenzene molecules themselves. Catalytic process claims (B01J) appear on 32.1% of records and inorganic-compound claims (C01B) on 28.6%, both well below the C07C base — meaning most filings pair a core chemistry claim with a narrower catalyst or feedstock claim rather than filing catalyst chemistry alone.
Shares are the percentage of the 28 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Styrene Production via Ethylbenzene Dehydrogenation with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about styrene production via ethylbenzene dehydrogenation and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe prior art doing the most citation work
CA2785808A1 — Styrene production processes and catalysts for use therein
Styrene production processes and catalysts for use therein are described herein. The process generally includes providing a C1 source; contacting the C1 source with toluene in the presence of a catalyst disposed within a reactor to form a product stream including ethylbenzene, wherein the catalyst includes a nanocrystalline zeolite; and recovering the product stream from the reactor.Filed by FINA Technology, Inc., 2011-08-11.
View filing details| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20090318743A1 | Combined carbon dioxide and oxygen process for ethylbenzene dehydrogenation to styrene | 22 |
| 2 | WO2009155219A1 | Combined carbon dioxide and oxygen process for ethylbenzene dehydrogenation to styrene | 9 |
| 3 | JP1991047140A | Method for multistage dehydrogenation of ethylbenzene with divided supply flow of hydrocarbon | 8 |
| 4 | US20180170836A1 | Parallel Reactor System for Ethylbenzene Dehydrogenation | 7 |
| 5 | WO2018118505A1 | Parallel reactor system for ethylbenzene dehydrogenation | 4 |
| 6 | WO1996016007A1 | A novel reverse flow strategy for ethylbenzene dehydrogenation in a packed-bed reactor | 2 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings; treat this table as a map of technical influence, not of current filing activity.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (6 of 6 rows); 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 the ranking, the trend and the citation table are read together.
The core route is not attracting new filings
Activity peaked at 7 filings in 2017 and had dropped to zero by 2022, with no recovery since. That is not the signature of a technology still being contested — it reads as a route where the dominant chemistry and reactor design are already claimed and stable.
Combined CO2/oxygen dehydrogenation is the reference point
The most-cited record in scope, on combined carbon dioxide and oxygen dehydrogenation, draws more than double the citations of the next entry. Later filers on energy integration and selectivity improvements are working in its shadow.
One filer dominates, everyone else has filed once or twice
The ranked leader holds 12 records; fifth and tenth place each hold just 1. Co-assignee pairs are also thin — the strongest pairings recur only twice — suggesting most work here is done by small, stable inventor teams rather than shifting alliances.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to styrene production via ethylbenzene dehydrogenation, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it is open
The ranking below covers the 11 companies the data endpoint returns for this scope — not a top-50 or top-100 cut. Momentum has flattened across the board: the assignees tracked for recent-year activity, including the current leader, each show zero filings in the latest year.
A single incumbent holds the largest slice of the ranking
The top-ranked assignee's 12 records outnumber the rest of the ranked field combined at the individual level, built up mostly during the pre-2018 filing years rather than recently.
Most other filers appear once or twice
Below the leader, the ranking drops fast: fifth place holds a single record, as does tenth. This is a field with one anchor tenant and a scattering of individual inventors and smaller filers rather than a competitive cluster of similarly-sized players.
Collaboration is narrow and recurring, not broad
Ten co-assignee pairs exist across the dataset, with the strongest recurring twice. That points to consistent small inventor teams working together across a handful of filings, rather than shifting joint ventures or licensing partnerships.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| FINA Technology, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Lummus Technology Inc. | 0 | — |
| YEH CHUEN YUAN | 0 | — |
| SONG RUOZHI | 0 | — |
| KOEGLER JOHANNES HENDRIK | 0 | — |
| GAFFNEY ANNE MAE | 0 | — |
| ARNOLD STEPHEN C | 0 | — |
| Amoco Corporation | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The trend and ranking above answer where the field has been. Two follow-ups matter more for a live filing decision.
Check the last 18 months directly against pending applications
Because publication lags filing, the apparent drop to zero after 2022 should be verified against pending and unpublished applications before concluding the field has gone cold.
Run a freshness check in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches against your own process design
Energy integration, parallel reactor systems and inhibitor dosing carry fewer claims than the core dehydrogenation chemistry — worth a closer freedom-to-operate look if your design touches any of them.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
Within this 28-record scope, one assignee leads the ranking with 12 records, well ahead of the rest of the field where fifth and tenth place each hold a single record. That leader's position was built up mostly in earlier filing years rather than recently, and recent-year momentum data shows zero new filings from this assignee in the latest year tracked. The overall ranked list covers 11 companies, so this is a concentrated field with a long tail rather than a broad competitive cluster.
Declining, based on the trend in this dataset: filings peaked at 7 in 2017 and had fallen to 0 by the 2022 midpoint, with no recovery through the most recent year. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one to two years likely understate true activity, but the multi-year plateau before that lag window is a genuine signal. Overall the pattern looks like a settled process area rather than one attracting fresh commercial-scale investment.
The most-cited record in this scope is US20090318743A1, 'Combined carbon dioxide and oxygen process for ethylbenzene dehydrogenation to styrene,' with 22 citations — more than double the next-most-cited record. High citation counts inside a searched corpus tend to favour older filings, so this reflects the record's role as a reference point for later work on combined-oxidant dehydrogenation schemes, not necessarily its current commercial dominance. Anyone filing on CO2 or oxygen co-feed approaches should expect to be evaluated against this filing's claims.
The IPC composition points to a few areas: catalytic process claims (B01J) appear on only 32.1% of the 28 records in scope and inorganic-compound claims (C01B) on 28.6%, both well behind the 100% of records carrying the core C07C organic-chemistry classification. That gap suggests narrower, well-defined branches — reactor energy integration, parallel reactor configurations, and inhibitor dosing during distillation — carry fewer claims than the base chemistry itself. These are the areas worth a closer freedom-to-operate check before assuming the space is closed.
CA2785808A1, filed by FINA Technology, Inc., claims a process that contacts a C1 source with toluene over a nanocrystalline zeolite catalyst to form ethylbenzene, which is then recovered as a product stream. That claim is specific to toluene-based ethylbenzene synthesis using a nanocrystalline zeolite catalyst system, not to ethylbenzene dehydrogenation to styrene generally. Work using different feedstocks, non-zeolite catalysts, or claiming the downstream dehydrogenation step rather than ethylbenzene synthesis itself would sit outside this particular claim scope, though a full claims read is needed before relying on that distinction.
Research Styrene Production via Ethylbenzene Dehydrogenation in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole styrene production via ethylbenzene dehydrogenation 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.