Turboexpander & Cryogenic NGL Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- 310 vs. 50. the leading assignee holds 310 of the ranked records, more than six times the fifth-place company's 50 — concentration sits almost entirely at the very top.
- 89.6% in one class. F25J gas liquefaction and separation covers 878 of the 980 records in scope, confirming nearly the entire field is classified under a single cryogenic-separation subclass.
- -30% on complete years. filings fell from 10 in 2021 to 7 in 2024; 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag, so this is not evidence the field is winding down.
Filing growth compares 2021 (10 records) with 2024 (7) — 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.
A field anchored by one classification and one applicant
Turboexpander and cryogenic NGL recovery patenting covers the equipment and process control used to chill natural gas, separate ethane and heavier liquids, and manage the resulting demethanizer and residue-gas streams. The 980 records in this dataset run from 2015 through a partial 2026, and nearly all of them — 89.6% — carry the F25J classification for gas liquefaction and separation, confirming that cryogenic separation process claims are the centre of gravity for this field rather than a peripheral topic.
Filing activity peaked in 2018 and has eased since on the years complete enough to compare, while classification data shows several adjacent branches — thermal power integration, catalytic processes, pressure-vessel design — that receive only a fraction of the attention the core separation claims do.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
The 980 records in scope span 2015 through the partial 2026 filing year, with classification concentrated tightly around cryogenic gas separation and a long tail of secondary subclasses that touch fuels, refining and pressure-vessel engineering.
A peak in 2018, then a documented pullback
Filings rose from 23 in 2017 to a peak of 35 in 2018. Using only the years complete enough to compare, filings fell from 10 in 2021 to 7 in 2024, a -30% change over that span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in as publication catches up with filing, so they should not be read as a continued decline yet.
F25J dominates; secondary classes mark adjacent claim territory
F25J (gas liquefaction and separation) appears on 89.6% of the 980 records, confirming this is the anchor classification for the field. C10L, B01D, C10G and C07C each cover roughly a tenth of records, reflecting overlap with fuel processing, filtration, refining and hydrocarbon chemistry. F17C, B01J and F01K sit under 3% each — these are the thinnest-claimed adjacent branches in the dataset.
Shares are the percentage of the 980 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Turboexpander and Cryogenic NGL Recovery with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about turboexpander and cryogenic ngl recovery and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records shaping this field
Methods and systems for removing nitrogen from natural gas (US20210156613A1)
Describes a pressure-management sub-system connecting an NGL recovery unit's demethanizer column to a nitrogen rejection unit through a separator and pump, letting recovered pressure drive part of the nitrogen-removal process rather than relying solely on external compression.Filed 2021-05-27 by Linde Engineering North America Inc.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6182469B1 | Hydrocarbon gas processing | 352 |
| 2 | US4171964A | Hydrocarbon gas processing | 294 |
| 3 | US6712880B2 | Cryogenic process utilizing high pressure absorber column | 228 |
| 4 | US4185978A | Method for cryogenic separation of carbon dioxide from hydrocarbons | 218 |
| 5 | US20060283207A1 | Hydrocarbon gas processing | 214 |
| 6 | US7191617B2 | Hydrocarbon gas processing | 212 |
| 7 | US6116050A | Propane recovery methods | 205 |
| 8 | US20080078205A1 | Hydrocarbon Gas Processing | 184 |
| 9 | US20090100862A1 | Hydrocarbon Gas Processing | 160 |
| 10 | US6526777B1 | LNG production in cryogenic natural gas processing plants | 149 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favour older filings; they signal influence on later drafting, not present-day commercial importance.
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
Reading citation weight, IPC spread and recent filing pace together shows a field with a settled core architecture and several under-explored edges.
Two records still anchor examiner reasoning
US6182469B1 (352 citations) and US4171964A (294 citations) sit well above the rest of the most-cited list, both describing core hydrocarbon gas processing architecture. New filings in cryogenic separation are likely being compared against these two regardless of filing year.
Filing peaked in 2018, then eased
Volume climbed from 23 filings in 2017 to 35 in 2018 before settling lower; on complete-year data, 2021's 10 filings dropped to 7 by 2024, a -30% change.
One subclass, several thin adjacents
F25J covers the overwhelming majority of records, while F17C, B01J and F01K each sit under 3% — these are the branches with room for a first-mover claim rather than a crowded one.
A steep drop after the top filer
The leading assignee's 310 records dwarf the tenth-ranked company's 26, out of 76 companies in the ranked list — a long tail of smaller filers sits beneath one dominant applicant.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to turboexpander and cryogenic ngl recovery, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked list covers 76 companies. One applicant's 310 records dwarf the rest, and recent-year momentum figures across the top names show filing activity has slowed broadly rather than shifting toward a new leader.
One applicant dominates the ranking
The top-ranked assignee holds 310 records versus 50 at fifth place and 26 at tenth, out of 76 companies ranked. This is a concentrated field at the top with a long tail beneath it.
Recent-year filing has gone quiet at the top
Every leading assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, including one showing a -100% year-on-year change, recorded zero filings in the latest year captured. This is consistent with publication lag rather than a definitive stop.
One applicant pair co-files far more than any other
Of 10 identified co-assignee pairs, the strongest shares 205 records — an order of magnitude above the next pairs at 38 and 27. This points to a long-running joint filing relationship rather than one-off collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Ortloff Engineers, Ltd. | 0 | — |
| S.M.E. Products LLP | 0 | — |
| Fluor Technologies Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| UOP LLC | 0 | — |
| Howe Baker Engineers, Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Fluor Corporation | 0 | — |
| PATEL ROHIT N | 0 | — |
| PATEL KIRTIKUMAR NATUBHAI | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The filing and classification data point to a field with a settled core and several specific edges worth deeper diligence before drafting or clearing a new filing.
Clear against the dense absorber-column and reflux cluster
Before drafting in the core cryogenic separation space, check new claims against the highest-cited records, which continue to anchor examiner reasoning years after filing.
Run a citation-aware searchScope a claim in an under-claimed branch
F17C, B01J and F01K each carry a small share of the 980 records and no dominant incumbent, making them a lower-risk starting point for a first claim.
Explore white space by IPC classWatch for renewed filing once publication lag clears
Recent-year counts near zero across leading assignees reflect the ~18-month gap between filing and publication, not necessarily reduced activity — revisit this trend once 2025-2026 data settles.
Track filing trends over timeCommon questions on turboexpander and cryogenic NGL recovery patents
Across the 76 companies in the ranked assignee list, one applicant leads with 310 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked company at 50 and the tenth-ranked at 26. That gap suggests a single applicant family has filed continuously on this technology rather than a cluster of similarly sized competitors. The ranking covers only the entities the data endpoint returns, not every company that has ever touched the space, so smaller or newer entrants may not show up prominently yet.
Both modes appear in the search scope for this dataset, and they are typically claimed as switchable operating states within the same demethanizer and reflux architecture rather than as separate plants. Patents in this space tend to claim the column-overhead reflux and residue-gas compression control logic that lets an operator toggle between the two modes depending on ethane market value. Because the underlying hardware overlaps heavily, freedom-to-operate analysis usually needs to look at the control and reflux claims rather than treating recovery and rejection as distinct technology families.
The dataset shows filings climbing from 23 in 2017 to a peak of 35 in 2018, the highest single year recorded in this scope. Filings compared on complete years fell from 10 in 2021 to 7 in 2024, a -30% change, though this should not be read as the technology losing relevance — dense early filing on core cryogenic separation architectures can itself reduce the number of clearly patentable follow-on filings. Readers should also note that 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months.
US20210156613A1, assigned to Linde Engineering North America and filed in 2021, claims a pressure-management sub-system that connects a demethanizer column's overhead (or an NGL expander) through a separator and pump into a nitrogen rejection unit's distillation column. It blocks that specific conduit-and-pump sequence, not nitrogen rejection as a general concept. Designs using turbines, ejectors or direct compression to manage pressure between the demethanizer and NRU sit outside the embodiments this filing describes, so a targeted clearance review of the exact process flow is more useful than assuming blanket coverage.
The IPC composition data points to three thin branches relative to the dominant F25J classification: F01K (steam and thermal power plant integration, 0.6% of the 980 records), B01J (catalytic and physical processes, 1.5%), and F17C (pressure vessels and gas storage, 2.6%). None of these appear among the most-cited records in the dataset, meaning there is no concentrated incumbent to design around there — the main risk for a new filer is obscure single-applicant prior art rather than a blocking portfolio held by a market leader.
Research Turboexpander and Cryogenic NGL Recovery in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole turboexpander and cryogenic ngl recovery 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.