USPTO 2015–2025 USPTO PatentsView US Corporation

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.

USPTO PatentsView assignee record - 8 granted patents across 10 technology areas, active 2015–2021. Filing-trend and competitive-moat analysis cross-referenced to USPTO Patent Public Search. Primary class: E04G (SCAFFOLDING; FORMS; SHUTTERING; BUILDING IMPLEMENTS OR AIDS, OR THEIR USE; HANDLING BUILDING MATERIALS ON THE SITE; REPAIRING, BREAKING-UP OR OTHER WORK ON EXISTING BUILDINGS).

Compiled byPlainPatent Editorial, US Patent Intelligence Editorial Team · May 15, 2026

Explore the portfolio See the ranking

Total patents granted

CPC technology areas

15.5

Avg claims per patent

-67%

5-year filing velocity

The verdict

Chicago holds 8 US patents across 10 technology areas, rank #31,278 of 50,000 tracked assignees.

#31,278
of 50,000 US assignees by volume: Top 74%
by Innovation Score (28.1/100): 15.5
avg claims per patent: -67%
filing velocity, last 5 yrs

Portfolio overview

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. has been granted 8 US utility patents between 2015 and 2021, placing Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. at rank #31,278 across all assignees tracked by PlainPatent. This portfolio spans 10 distinct Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) subclasses, averaging 15.5 claims per patent with primary concentration in E04G (SCAFFOLDING; FORMS; SHUTTERING; BUILDING IMPLEMENTS OR AIDS, OR THEIR USE; HANDLING BUILDING MATERIALS ON THE SITE; REPAIRING, BREAKING-UP OR OTHER WORK ON EXISTING BUILDINGS). As a US Corporation, Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. is one of the more focused assignees in the PatentsView dataset. By volume, Chicago sits between Chemgenes Corporation (8 patents, rank #31,274) and Christopher Cox Creative (8 patents, rank #31,282) - the closest US assignees by grant volume. The composite Innovation Score of 28.1/100 blends portfolio volume, filing velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth into a single comparable measure drawn directly from USPTO PatentsView records.

Filing cadence tells the strategic story. Between 2020 and 2025 the company received 2 grants, compared with 6 in the 2015–2019 window, a -67% shift in five-year velocity. A cooling filing rate may reflect portfolio consolidation, shifting priorities, or reduced R&D throughput. The US Corporation classification further shapes interpretation, since corporate, government, and individual filers pursue patents for materially different reasons.

Claim depth and technology breadth together indicate competitive posture. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s 15.5 average claims per patent sits within the typical range for solid legal coverage without excessive prosecution cost, while concentration in 10 subclasses points to a focused technical program. Combined with portfolio volume, these signals let analysts, investors, and licensing professionals benchmark Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. against peers pursuing similar technology classes.

Chemgenes

8
Chemeon Surface T…

8
Chemomouthpiece

8
Chen Tian

8
Chicago Stock Exc…

8
China Academy of…

8
Chinook Therapeut…

8
Christopher Cox C…

8
Chicago Bridge &… ◀

8

What this shows Chicago holds 8 patents at rank #31,278, shown against the 8 assignees closest to it in grant volume rather than the industry's largest filers.

Companies ranked near Chicago

By rank, the assignees closest to #31,278 in granted patent volume.

Leaders in E04G (Scaffolding)

Other assignees with the most granted patents in Chicago's primary technology class.

Chicago's Innovation Score vs. every tracked assignee

Composite of portfolio volume, filing velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth (0–100)

28 Top 74% higher than 26% of 50,000 US assignees

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more US assignees. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count, share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source USPTO PatentsView, PlainPatent Innovation Score · 2015–2025

USPTO utility patent grants by year · 2015–2021

Grants by year

Teal-shaded recent years (2020–present) versus the 2015–2019 baseline. Full figures in the table below.

View data table

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. patent grants by year, 2015–2025
Year	Patents Granted	Share of Period
2015	2	25.0%
2016	1	12.5%
2017	3	37.5%
2021	2	25.0%

Which technologies does Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. patent most?

E04G - SCAFFOLDING; FORMS; SHUTTERING; BUILDING IMPLEMENTS OR AIDS, OR THEIR USE; HANDLING BUILDING MATERIALS ON THE SITE; REPAIRING, BREAKING-UP OR OTHER WORK ON EXISTING BUILDINGS 4

B66F - HOISTING, LIFTING, HAULING OR PUSHING, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR, e.g. DEVICES WHICH APPLY A LIFTING OR PUSHING FORCE DIRECTLY TO THE SURFACE OF A LOAD 4

F17C - VESSELS FOR CONTAINING OR STORING COMPRESSED, LIQUEFIED OR SOLIDIFIED GASES; FIXED-CAPACITY GAS-HOLDERS; FILLING VESSELS WITH, OR DISCHARGING FROM VESSELS, COMPRESSED, LIQUEFIED, OR SOLIDIFIED GASES 3

Y10T - TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER US CLASSIFICATION 2

E04B - GENERAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS; WALLS, e.g. PARTITIONS; ROOFS; FLOORS; CEILINGS; INSULATION OR OTHER PROTECTION OF BUILDINGS 2

B66B - ELEVATORS; ESCALATORS OR MOVING WALKWAYS 2

Y02E - REDUCTION OF GREENHOUSE GAS [GHG] EMISSIONS, RELATED TO ENERGY GENERATION, TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION 2

B01F - MIXING, e.g. DISSOLVING, EMULSIFYING OR DISPERSING 1

C12M - APPARATUS FOR ENZYMOLOGY OR MICROBIOLOGY; APPARATUS FOR CULTURING MICROORGANISMS FOR PRODUCING BIOMASS, FOR GROWING CELLS OR FOR OBTAINING FERMENTATION OR METABOLIC PRODUCTS, i.e. BIOREACTORS OR FERMENTERS 1

C02F - TREATMENT OF WATER, WASTE WATER, SEWAGE, OR SLUDGE 1

Top 10 of 10 technology areas

Patent Moat Analysis

Portfolio Volume Light

Tech Breadth Focused

Claim Depth Standard

Velocity Declining

Where it ranks

Overall rank by patents

#31,278

Across all tracked assignees

Innovation Score

28.1 out of 100

View all rankings →

Data Source

USPTO PatentsView, US granted patents 2015–2025

How is Innovation Score calculated?

Frequently Asked Questions

How many patents does Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. hold?

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. holds 8 US granted patents filed between 2015 and 2021, spanning 10 technology areas.

What is Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s Innovation Score?

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. has an Innovation Score of 28.1 out of 100. This composite metric weighs portfolio volume (40%), filing velocity (20%), technology breadth (25%), and claim depth (15%).

What technology areas does Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. focus on?

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s top technology area is E04G (SCAFFOLDING; FORMS; SHUTTERING; BUILDING IMPLEMENTS OR AIDS, OR THEIR USE; HANDLING BUILDING MATERIALS ON THE SITE; REPAIRING, BREAKING-UP OR OTHER WORK ON EXISTING BUILDINGS) with 4 patents. The company has filed patents in 10 CPC subclasses total.

Is Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s patent filing rate increasing or decreasing?

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s recent filing velocity is -67% compared to the prior five-year period. Filing activity has slowed relative to earlier years.

What does claim depth mean for Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s patents?

Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.'s patents average 15.5 claims each. This falls within the standard range, providing solid legal coverage.

How is the Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. patent data sourced?

All patent data comes from USPTO PatentsView, a public research dataset maintained by the United States Patent and Trademark Office covering US granted utility patents from 2015 to 2025.

How to use this portfolio

Chicago's 8 grants land it in the top 74% by Innovation Score, but volume alone doesn't tell you where the strength sits.

Read that count against the largest US assignees before treating it as dominance - Chicago ranks #31,278 of 50,000. Top 50 holders
Most of this portfolio concentrates in E04G - see who else leads that technology area. E04G leaders
Check what the four-part Innovation Score actually rewards before comparing it to another company. How the score works

Patent counts and the Innovation Score measure patenting activity, not commercial success or the legal strength of any patent. Many patents are filed defensively. Verify the status of an individual patent against official USPTO records.

Data sourced from USPTO PatentsView - official U.S. government patent data. See our methodology for computation details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainPatent Editorial

Disclaimer: This information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. Data is sourced from the USPTO PatentsView database. Consult a qualified professional before making decisions based on this data.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sources used on this page

USPTO PatentsView - the disambiguated bulk patent-grant, assignee, and CPC data this page's figures are derived from. patentsview.org
Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) - the joint USPTO/EPO classification scheme used to group patents by technology area. cooperativepatentclassification.org
USPTO Patent Public Search - the official interface to verify the status of any individual patent. ppubs.uspto.gov

Compiled byPlainPatent Editorial, US Patent Intelligence Editorial Team · May 15, 2026

Every figure on PlainPatent is rendered directly from USPTO source data, no number is typed in by an editor. This page draws directly on USPTO source data, no figure is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of May 2026.