Technical Textiles Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- 55.4% of all 213 records in scope sit with just five assignees, with one leader holding 64 records against a fifth-place count of 10.
- Filing peaked in 2017 at 14 records and the trend since is too thin post-lag to call a growth rate — treat the most recent years as undercounted, not declining.
- Classification spreads across eight IPC subclasses from containers (B65D, 26.8%) to body-fluid devices (A61M, 18.8%), showing technical textiles claims routinely cross into packaging and medical-device art.
Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 213 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the technical textiles patent record actually covers
The 213 records in scope span filings that combine technical or engineered textile language with structural or functional descriptors such as fiber diameter and web structure. That search construction pulls in claims from applicator and dispensing hardware, nonwoven filtration media, composite veils, and absorbent hygiene structures — a wider net than a narrow ‘textile machinery’ search would return, and it is why the IPC composition below leans so heavily on packaging and cosmetics classes rather than classic weaving or knitting codes.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the drop to zero in the most recent year reflects the reporting window, not a stop in activity. The dataset is best read at the family level, since it neutralises repeat continuation filings from the same applicant.
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 213-record set: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend, 2015-2026
Filings ran to a peak of 14 records in 2017; the fall to 0 by 2026 reflects an incomplete final year rather than a real stop, since publication trails filing by around 18 months.
IPC subclass composition
Each record can carry more than one IPC class, so the eight subclasses shown — led by B65D containers and packaging at 26.8% of the 213 records — sum to well over 100%. Read this as where claim attention overlaps, not as a partition of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 213 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Technical Textiles Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about technical textiles patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
Resin-soluble veils for composite article fabrication and methods of manufacturing the same (US20120141728A1)
The filing covers resin-soluble thermoplastic veils used in liquid resin infusion processes for composite manufacturing, along with methods for producing both the veils and the finished composite articles. The veils act as a toughening agent once incorporated into the composite, and the filing claims improved uniformity and reduced thickness relative to earlier veil designs.Assignee: Cytec Technology Corp. Filed/published 2012-06-07.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6726386B1 | Semi-enclosed applicator and a cleaning composition contained therein | 185 |
| 2 | US20050026526A1 | High performance filter media with internal nanofiber structure and manufacturing methodology | 180 |
| 3 | US7108440B1 | Applicator for distributing a substance onto a target surface | 119 |
| 4 | US7021848B1 | Semi-enclosed applicator having a temperature changing element | 104 |
| 5 | US20110064936A1 | Method of Asymmetrically Functionalizing Porous Materials | 102 |
| 6 | US20020017310A1 | Semi-enclosed applicator for distributing a subtance onto a target surface | 100 |
| 7 | US20070021021A1 | High performance filter media with internal nanofiber structure and manufacturing methodology | 96 |
| 8 | US7754123B2 | High performance filter media with internal nanofiber structure and manufacturing methodology | 90 |
| 9 | US20060069380A1 | Foam-based fasteners | 60 |
| 10 | US7255506B2 | Semi-enclosed applicator for distributing a substance onto a target surface | 59 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references — treat this as a measure of influence within the corpus, not 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 concentration and composition figures mean for freedom to operate
The ranking and the class overlap point the same direction: a small set of assignees hold dense claim positions in a few overlapping subclasses, while the rest of the 213-record set is thin and dispersed.
Filing sits with a small group, not a long tail alone
With the leader alone holding 64 records and a fifth-place assignee at 10, the field is not evenly distributed. A new entrant filing in the same applicator or absorbent-structure space should expect prior art from a small number of repeat filers rather than a diffuse crowd.
Technical textiles claims cluster at the packaging/device boundary
The top IPC subclasses run from containers and packaging (B65D) through layered products (B32B) to cosmetics and body-fluid devices (A61Q, A61M). That spread signals that most technical-textile claims in this corpus are functional add-ons to a delivery or dispensing mechanism, not standalone fiber or web inventions.
Treat the recent-year drop as a reporting artefact
The filing count falls to zero by the final year in scope, but with fewer than four complete years once the roughly 18-month publication lag is accounted for, no growth rate can honestly be computed from this trend. Read the peak year as the strongest confirmed signal, not the trajectory since.
Recent-year momentum reads flat for the leaders
Every one of the top tracked assignees shows zero recorded activity in the latest year, consistent with the publication-lag effect rather than a genuine pullback. Co-assignee pairs involving the leading filer and named individual inventors recur at a count of 9, suggesting stable internal filing teams rather than new external partnerships.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to technical textiles patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee concentration and where the gaps sit
The ranked list covers 75 companies and individual filers across the 213 records in scope — not a top-50 or top-100 cut, but the full set the data endpoint returns.
A single filer holds close to a third of the corpus alone
The leading assignee's 64 records dwarf the fifth-place count of 10, meaning any competitive read of this space starts with one applicator- and dispensing-technology filer before considering anyone else.
The next tier is closely bunched, not another single leader
Counts from fifth to tenth place sit close together (10 down to 9), pointing to a genuine mid-tier of active filers rather than a clean second-place company. Composite, absorbent-hygiene and coating-apparatus filers populate this band.
Named-inventor pairs recur inside one corporate filer
The strongest co-assignee pairs in the dataset all pair the leading corporate filer with individual named inventors at a count of 9 each, rather than showing cross-company collaboration. That pattern is typical of an in-house R&D team filing consistently rather than a joint venture.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Procter & Gamble Co | 0 | — |
| Cytec Technology Corp | 0 | — |
| Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Bromine Compounds Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Drexel University | 0 | -100% |
| Board of Regents, The University of Texas System | 0 | — |
| MANSKE THOMAS JAMES JR | 0 | — |
| GRUENBACHER DANA PAUL | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The concentration and composition figures point to specific follow-up work depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or new filing strategy.
Map claims against the leading assignee's portfolio
With one filer holding 64 of 213 records, a claim-by-claim comparison against that portfolio is the first filter for any new applicator or dispensing-structure filing.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTrace the most-cited records forward
The five most-cited records in this corpus, led by a semi-enclosed applicator patent cited 185 times, mark where downstream filers have repeatedly built on prior art.
Run a citation trace in EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for freedom to operate
Sub-areas like asymmetric porous-material functionalisation and nanofiber filter structures show comparatively thin density and may offer room for a first-mover claim.
Check white space in EurekaCommon questions on the technical textiles patent landscape
One assignee leads the ranked list with 64 of the 213 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 10. The top five combined account for 55.4% of all 213 records, so the field is concentrated rather than evenly spread. Any competitive analysis should start by mapping that leader's claims before looking at the broader mid-tier of filers.
The trend peaked in 2017 at 14 records and has trailed off since, but that decline is not a reliable growth signal. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, and there are fewer than four complete years of data once that lag is accounted for, so no honest growth rate can be computed from this trend. The 2017 peak is the strongest confirmed data point in the series.
The records in scope classify most heavily under B65D (containers and packaging, 26.8% of 213 records), followed by B32B (layered products and laminates), A47L (cleaning appliances), A61F (implants and prostheses), A45D (hairdressing and toilet equipment), A61M (body-fluid devices), A61Q (cosmetics) and B05C (coating apparatus). Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these shares add up to more than 100%, reflecting how often technical-textile claims sit alongside packaging, cosmetics or medical-device art rather than standing alone.
Comparatively thin filing density shows up in branches like asymmetric porous-material functionalisation, nanofiber-based internal filter structures, and resin-soluble veil toughening agents used in composite fabrication. These sit adjacent to the dense applicator and absorbent-structure clusters that dominate the top assignees' portfolios. A first claim in these areas would need to specify the structural or functional mechanism precisely, since the surrounding art in packaging and coating apparatus classes is already dense.
The United States receives the most filings in this dataset at 60, followed by the WIPO PCT route at 29 and the European Patent Office at 27. Australia, Canada and India follow at 15, 14 and 13 respectively. That spread suggests applicants are pursuing broad PCT coverage before narrowing to US and European national phase, with secondary interest in Commonwealth and Indian markets.
Research Technical Textiles Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole technical textiles patent landscape 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.