Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/weaving-knitting-and-fabrication-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Textiles, Fibers, Pulp & PaperWeaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patents: Who Holds the Ground and Where It's Open
- 28.5% of all 249 records sit with just five assignees, so the field is more concentrated at the top than its long tail of single-filing entrants suggests.
- Filing peaked in 2018 at 14 records and the 2021-to-2024 span shows an 11-to-8 drop, a 27% pullback in the most recent years that can be read as complete.
- D03D woven-fabric claims lead at 26.1% but A61L, B29C and A61F each sit above 22%, showing the field is really a cluster of medical-device and materials claims layered onto fabric structure.
249
Published Records
29%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-27%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (11 records) with 2024 (8) — 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 249 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What this landscape covers
This landscape maps patent activity where fiber or fabric weaving claims intersect with process-control concepts like fiber orientation, yarn tension, fabric density,
The IPC mix is the first signal worth reading closely: woven-fabric claims (D03D) are the largest single class, but sterilising and disinfecting (A61L), plastics shaping (B29C) and implants and prostheses (A61F) each cover more than a fifth of records. That overlap points to a field where fabric-formation patents are frequently filed alongside, or as part of, biomedical and polymer-processing claims rather than as pure textile-machinery filings.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 249-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A 2018 peak, then a measured pullback
Filings ran from 9 in 2017 to a peak of 14 in 2018. The most recent complete comparison — 2021's 11 records against 2024's 8 — works out to a 27% decline over that three-year span. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures as still filling in rather than as evidence of a continued drop.
Fabric structure claims sit alongside biomedical and polymer classes
D03D (woven fabrics and weaving) leads at 26.1% of the 249 records in scope, with A61L, B29C and A61F each above 22%. Because records commonly carry more than one IPC class, these shares add up to well over 100% — the overlap itself is the finding, not an error.
Shares are the percentage of the 249 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about weaving, knitting & fabrication patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited records in this space
Representative Filing
Engineered materials and methods of forming (US20180230626A1)
BIOCONIX PTY LTD.
A method of forming a substrate includes mapping a three dimensional spatial distribution of at least one structural protein fiber of extracellular matrix of biological material of interest, designing a fiber assembly pattern based on an intrinsic pattern of the at least one structural protein fiber of the extracellular matrix of the biological material, and assembling fibers based on the fiber assembly pattern to form the substrate.Filed by Bioconix Pty Ltd, published 2018-08-16 — chosen here as representative of the biomaterial-fiber-mapping approach rather than as the single most-cited record.
Highest-citation records in scope
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6838493B2 | Medical devices and applications of polyhydroxyalkanoate polymers | 1,833 |
| 2 | US6867248B1 | Polyhydroxyalkanoate compositions having controlled degradation rates | 1,629 |
| 3 | WO2000056376A1 | Medical devices and applications of polyhydroxyalkanoate polymers | 279 |
| 4 | US20020156150A1 | Medical devices and applications of polyhydroxyalkanoate polymers | 276 |
| 5 | US20080206297A1 | Porous composite biomaterials and related methods | 257 |
| 6 | WO1999032536A1 | Polyhydroxyalkanoate compositions having controlled degradation rates | 212 |
| 7 | US7179883B2 | Medical devices and applications of polyhydroxyalkanoate polymers | 158 |
| 8 | US20020173558A1 | Medical devices and applications of polyhydroxyalkanoate polymers | 121 |
| 9 | US20140236299A1 | Porous composite biomaterials and related methods | 98 |
| 10 | US20040052861A1 | Sol-gel derived bioactive glass polymer composite | 70 |
Citation counts reward older filings simply because they've had longer to accumulate references — read them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the data means for filing strategy
Three readings of the same dataset, each pointing to a different decision a filer or licensor would need to make.
Concentration
28.5% of 249 records
held by the top five assignees
The top of the field is tighter than the ranking's length suggests
With 100 companies ranked but the leader alone at 22 records, the field reads as a small group of repeat filers surrounded by a long tail of one- or two-record entrants. New filers should expect to negotiate around, not simply outnumber, the leading positions.
Based on the 249-record assignee ranking
Filing momentum
-27% (2021 vs 2024)
three-year filing change
Activity has cooled from its 2018 peak
Filings peaked at 14 records in 2018 and the most recent complete comparison shows an 11-to-8 drop from 2021 to 2024. That is a pullback in volume, not necessarily in commercial relevance — publication lag means 2025 and 2026 counts will keep rising.
2021-2024 span, most recent complete years
Technology overlap
4 classes above 22%
D03D, A61L, B29C, A61F
Fabric claims are rarely filed alone
D03D leads at 26.1% of the 249 records, but A61L, B29C and A61F each sit above 22%, meaning a large share of weaving and knitting filings are bundled with sterilisation, plastics-shaping or implant claims. Freedom-to-operate searches limited to pure textile classes will miss a meaningful slice of blocking art.
Shares sum above 100% because records carry multiple IPC classes
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to weaving, knitting & fabrication patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Repeat co-filing among a small cluster of inventors
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| SMITH STEPHEN M | ROEDER RYAN K | 9 |
| SMITH STEPHEN M | CONVERSE GABRIEL L | 9 |
| ROEDER RYAN K | CONVERSE GABRIEL L | 9 |
| BIOCONIX PTY LTD | KNOTHE TATE MELISSA | 5 |
| Asahi Kasei Corporation | Asahi Kasei Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha | 3 |
| SMITH STEPHEN M | University of Notre Dame | 2 |
| ROEDER RYAN K | University of Notre Dame | 2 |
| CONVERSE GABRIEL L | University of Notre Dame | 2 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest triad of individual inventors each co-filing 9 times together — a pattern consistent with a small, stable research group rather than a broad industry consortium.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where the map is thin
The ranking spans 100 companies, from a leader at 22 records down to single-filing entrants. Reading the leaders alongside the technology composition shows where competitive pressure is real and where it is largely absent.
Leader
22 records
top-ranked assignee
One filer sits well ahead of fifth place
The leading assignee holds 22 records against 10 at fifth place and 7 at tenth — a steep drop-off that marks this as a leader-plus-tail field rather than an evenly matched competitive set.
Assignee ranking, 249 records
Mid-field
10 records
fifth-place assignee
A cluster forms just below the leader
Fifth place at 10 records and tenth at 7 show a mid-tier group close enough in volume to be genuine alternatives when the leader's claims are too dense to design around.
Top 10 combined: 114 records, 45.8% of all 249
Long tail
100 companies ranked
full assignee ranking
Most of the ranking is single- or low-volume filers
Beyond the top ten, the ranked list thins out quickly, consistent with academic labs, individual inventors and smaller manufacturers filing opportunistically rather than building a sustained portfolio.
Ranked total, not a top-100 cutoff
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Metabolix Inc. | 0 | — |
| Asahi Kasei Corporation | 0 | — |
| Bauer Hockey LLC | 0 | — |
| BIOCONIX PTY LTD | 0 | — |
| Northeastern University (US) | 0 | — |
| Rutgers, The State University | 0 | -100% |
| SMITH STEPHEN M | 0 | — |
| ROEDER RYAN K | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is filing, licensing or freedom-to-operate clearance.
Check freedom-to-operate across bundled classes
Because D03D fabric claims frequently overlap with A61L, B29C and A61F filings in the same records, a search limited to textile-machinery classes alone will miss relevant prior art.
Run a cross-class search in EurekaWatch the mid-tier cluster, not just the leader
The gap between fifth and tenth place is narrow enough that licensing or partnership conversations may be more productive with the mid-tier group than with the single leading assignee.
Compare assignee portfolios in EurekaRevisit 2025-2026 filings once they mature
Publication lag means the apparent slowdown after 2018 needs re-checking against later data before it's read as a genuine pullback in R&D activity.
Track filing trends in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
The assignee ranking for this dataset covers 100 companies, with the leader holding 22 of the 249 records in scope. The top five assignees combined account for 28.5% of all records, and the top ten for 45.8%, which means roughly half of the documented activity sits with a small group while the rest of the ranking thins into single- or low-volume filers. Anyone assessing competitive risk should focus first on that leading group before treating the long tail as a serious blocking risk.
Filing peaked at 14 records in 2018, and the most recent years that can be treated as complete show an 11-to-8 drop between 2021 and 2024, a 27% decline over that span. However, publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a continued slowdown. The honest reading is a cooling from a 2018 high, with the very latest trend still unresolved.
Sterilising and disinfecting (A61L), plastics shaping (B29C) and implants and prostheses (A61F) each appear in more than 22% of the 249 records, close to the 26.1% share held by woven-fabric claims (D03D) themselves. This overlap indicates that a large portion of weaving and knitting filings are biomedical or polymer-processing patents that happen to claim fabric structure, rather than pure textile-machinery filings. A search strategy limited to D03D alone will miss a meaningful share of relevant art.
Sub-areas such as pulp treatment process controls, web bonding for nonwoven composites, and yarn tension feedback systems show markedly lower claim density than the leading IPC classes in this dataset. These branches sit adjacent to the dominant D03D, A61L and B29C clusters but haven't attracted the same filing volume, which suggests room for narrowly drafted claims that don't collide with the leader's dense prior art. Confirming white space still requires a targeted freedom-to-operate search rather than relying on aggregate class counts alone.
The most-cited records in this dataset cluster around polyhydroxyalkanoate-based medical device and biomaterial patents, with citation counts ranging into the thousands for the oldest filings. High citation counts favour older patents simply because they've had more time to accumulate references, so they signal historical influence within this corpus rather than current commercial importance. Newer filings with lower citation counts may still be more relevant to a present-day filing or licensing decision.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Weaving, Knitting & Fabrication Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole weaving, knitting & fabrication 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.