Supercritical Foaming Midsole Patents: Top Filers & Trends 2026
- 71.4% concentration. The five leading assignees hold 45 of the 63 records in scope, and the top ten push that to 88.9% — a field with very little room left at the centre.
- One assignee dominates. The leader alone accounts for 21 of the 63 records, well ahead of a fifth-place holder at 4 and a tenth-place holder at 2.
- Footwear claims outnumber polymer-science claims. A43B footwear classifications appear on 49.2% of records versus 38.1% for C08J polymer processing, suggesting application-side claiming is outpacing the underlying material science.
Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 63 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the filings cover and why it matters
Supercritical foaming applies a gas — typically CO2 or nitrogen — above its critical point to a polymer melt, producing a cellular foam structure without chemical blowing agents. In midsole applications the technique is used to control cell structure, foam density and rebound resilience, the three properties that separate a commercially usable cushioning foam from a laboratory sample. The patent record spans process claims (saturation pressure, cycle time, nucleation agents) and article claims (the finished midsole or frame), and the balance between the two tells a buyer or licensor where the enforceable ground actually sits.
This dataset covers 63 published records filed or published between 2015 and the 2026-07-31 cut-off. Publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent filing year is understated and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 63 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing activity climbed to a 2023 peak
Annual filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 16 in 2023, with 7 recorded in the most recent year — a figure that will revise upward as later publications clear the pipeline. The run-up through 2023 marks the period when supercritical foaming moved from a niche process claim to a mainstream midsole construction method.
Footwear and polymer-processing classes dominate
A43B (footwear) appears on 49.2% of the 63 records, ahead of C08J (polymer processing, 38.1%) and B29C (plastics shaping, 33.3%). Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these shares sum to more than 100%; the pattern still shows claim density concentrated in footwear construction and core plastics processing, with polysaccharide-based foam chemistry (C08B, 9.5%) and moulding-material formulations (B29K, 7.9%) far less crowded.
Shares are the percentage of the 63 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Supercritical Foaming of Midsole Materials with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about supercritical foaming of midsole materials and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
Low-temperature supercritical foaming process
A two-stage process: a polyolefin or thermoplastic elastomer is saturated with inert gas under pressure at a temperature 5-40°C below its melting point, then depressurised to expand into a primary foam, which is subsequently cured in a tunnel furnace to finish the cell structure.Filed by Fujian Xingxun New Materials Technology, published 2022-06-16.
View full filing| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20150065591A1 | Modified starch compositions, starch composite foam materials and method for preparing the starch composite f… | 9 |
| 2 | WO2014086744A1 | Polyarylene foam materials | 9 |
| 3 | EP1818449A1 | Method for coating a substrate and printing sheet obtained using such method | 4 |
| 4 | US20250311810A1 | Article of footwear having a frame and method of manufacturing a midsole member of an article of footwear | 3 |
| 5 | US20240188678A1 | Article of footwear having a frame and method of manufacturing a midsole member of an article of footwear | 3 |
| 6 | US20240017509A1 | Method of manufacturing a tunable midsole for an article of footwear | 3 |
| 7 | US20220185981A1 | Low-temperature supercritical foaming process | 3 |
| 8 | CN116554535A | 石墨烯改性橡塑发泡胶粒及其制备方法 | 2 |
| 9 | CN115260645A | 环保弹性EVA鞋底及其制备方法 | 2 |
| 10 | EP2853546A1 | Modified starch compositions, starch composite foam materials and method for preparing the starch composite f… | 2 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings and should be read as a signal of influence, not current 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 say about the field
Three patterns stand out once the records are ranked, dated and classified.
The centre of the field is closed
With the five leading assignees controlling 45 of 63 records, new entrants working on mainstream saturation-pressure or nucleation-agent approaches are likely filing into occupied claim space rather than open ground.
One filer sets the pace
The leading assignee's 21 records dwarf the fifth-place holder's 4, indicating a single company has built a defensive filing position rather than the field being an even contest among several peers.
Activity peaked, then eased
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a 2023 peak of 16 before easing to 7 in the latest partial year. Given the typical 18-month publication lag, the true 2025-2026 filing level is understated in the current count.
Application claims lead process claims
Footwear-classified records outnumber polymer-processing records, suggesting more parties are staking claims on the finished midsole article and construction method than on the underlying supercritical process chemistry itself.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to supercritical foaming of midsole materials, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the ground, and where it is thin
The ranking covers 24 companies returned by the data endpoint — the full set, not a top-50 or top-100 cut. Momentum varies sharply even among top holders.
A dominant single-assignee position
The top-ranked assignee holds roughly a third of all records in the dataset outright, a scale no other single filer approaches.
Smaller filers accelerating fast
Two assignees each moved from 1 to 3 records in the latest year, a +200% year-over-year jump that signals active, recent investment even though their absolute totals stay small.
A leading filer has slowed
One of the largest historical filers dropped from 5 to 3 records year over year, a pattern worth checking against licensing or product-cycle timing before assuming disengagement.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Puma Europe | 3 | -40% |
| Sambu Fine Chemicals Co., Ltd. | 3 | +200% |
| PARK HEEDAE | 3 | +200% |
| 361 Degrees (Fujian) Sporting Goods Co., Ltd. | 1 | 0% |
| Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) | 0 | — |
| Solvay Specialty Polymers USA, LLC | 0 | — |
| Fujian Xingxun New Materials Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Adidas AG | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this
The landscape points to a concentrated core and a thinner periphery. Two directions follow from that.
Map the white space in polysaccharide and moulding-material claims
C08B and B29K classes carry the fewest records of the eight IPC subclasses tracked here, which is where a differentiated formulation claim is least likely to collide with the leader's existing portfolio.
Explore white space in EurekaWatch momentum, not just rank
Assignees with small absolute counts but sharp year-over-year growth are a better early signal of where competitive pressure is building than the historical leaderboard alone.
Track assignee momentum in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
This dataset covers 63 published records filed or published between 2015 and the 2026-07-31 cut-off, drawn from a search combining supercritical foaming process terms with midsole-specific structural and performance terms. The true total is somewhat higher than 63 once recent filings clear the roughly 18-month publication lag. The 63-record count is the denominator used for every share figure in this landscape.
The ranking returns 24 assignees, with the leader holding 21 of the 63 records in scope — well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 4 records and the tenth-place holder at 2. The top five assignees combined account for 71.4% of all records, and the top ten reach 88.9%, so the field is heavily concentrated rather than evenly spread. A newcomer should expect to file around, not through, this existing cluster on mainstream approaches.
Yes, though it sits away from the crowded footwear-article and core plastics-processing classes. C08B (polysaccharide-based foam chemistry) and B29K (moulding-material formulations) each appear on under 10% of the 63 records, well below the 49.2% carried by A43B footwear claims, indicating formulation-level and bio-based approaches are comparatively under-claimed. High density in the core classes signals occupied claim space, not that the underlying technology is exhausted.
That filing, from Fujian Xingxun New Materials Technology and published 2022-06-16, describes a two-stage low-temperature process: saturating a polyolefin or thermoplastic elastomer with inert gas at a temperature 5-40°C below its melting point, then depressurising to form a primary foam that is subsequently finished in a tunnel furnace. It sits within the process-claim side of the landscape rather than the article-claim side, meaning it constrains how a foam is made rather than how a finished midsole is shaped or marketed. Anyone replicating this specific temperature-offset saturation sequence should review the claim scope directly rather than relying on the abstract alone.
Annual filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 16 in 2023, then eased to 7 in the most recent year of the dataset. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, that most recent figure understates actual filing activity and will likely revise upward as later applications publish. The 2023 peak marks the point at which supercritical foaming appears to have moved from experimental process claims toward broader commercial midsole construction filings.
Research Supercritical Foaming of Midsole Materials in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole supercritical foaming of midsole materials 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.