USPTO 2015–2025 USPTO PatentsView Foreign Corporation

Lafarge

USPTO PatentsView assignee record - 26 granted patents across 25 technology areas, recorded in grant years 2015–2018. Grant-trend analysis is cross-referenced to USPTO Patent Public Search; it does not measure application filings, current R&D, or legal strength. Primary class: C04B (LIME, MAGNESIA; SLAG; CEMENTS; COMPOSITIONS THEREOF, e.g. MORTARS, CONCRETE OR LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS; ARTIFICIAL STONE ; CERAMICS ; REFRACTORIES; TREATMENT OF NATURAL STONE).

Compiled by PlainPatent, US Patent Intelligence Editorial Process · May 15, 2026

Explore the portfolio See the ranking

Total patents granted

CPC technology areas

13.8

Avg claims per patent

-100%

5-year grant velocity

The verdict

According to USPTO PatentsView, Lafarge ranks #11,708 of 50,000 tracked US assignees by granted-patent volume, with 26 patents across 25 technology areas.

#11,708
of 50,000 US assignees by volume: Top 44%
by Innovation Score (37.3/100): 13.8
avg claims per patent: -100%
grant velocity, last 5 yrs

Portfolio overview

Lafarge has been granted 26 US utility patents between 2015 and 2018, placing Lafarge at #11,708 of 50,000 across all assignees tracked by PlainPatent. This portfolio spans 25 distinct Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) subclasses, averaging 13.8 claims per patent with primary concentration in C04B (LIME, MAGNESIA; SLAG; CEMENTS; COMPOSITIONS THEREOF, e.g. MORTARS, CONCRETE OR LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS; ARTIFICIAL STONE ; CERAMICS ; REFRACTORIES; TREATMENT OF NATURAL STONE). As a Foreign Corporation, Lafarge is one of the more focused assignees in the PatentsView dataset. By volume, Lafarge sits between Knox Associates, Inc. (26 patents, rank #11,704) and Lilac Solutions, Inc. (26 patents, rank #11,712) - the closest US assignees by grant volume. The composite Innovation Score of 37.3/100 blends portfolio volume, grant velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth into a single comparable measure drawn directly from USPTO PatentsView records.

Grant cadence records the difference between two grant-year windows. Between 2020 and 2024 the company received 0 grants, compared with 26 in the 2015–2019 window, a -100% shift in five-year grant velocity. Both windows cover five complete grant years; the latest PatentsView year is a partial release and is excluded from this comparison, though it still appears in the yearly table and chart below. Grant timing can lag the related application by years, so this comparison does not establish current R&D spending, strategic intent, or a company’s application activity. The Foreign Corporation classification provides context for the assignee record, not a conclusion about its business strategy.

Claim depth and technology breadth describe this aggregate record. Lafarge's 13.8 average claims per patent is an average count, not a measure of claim scope, legal strength, enforceability, or design-around risk. The record spans 25 CPC subclasses. Combined with portfolio volume, these figures let readers compare the documented grant records of assignees in similar technology classes.

Knox Associates

26
Konnectronix

26
Kraton

26
L3vel

26
Lanxess Solutions…

26
Lemken & KG

26
Lianyungang Runzh…

26
Lilac Solutions

26
Lafarge ◀

26

What this shows Lafarge holds 26 patents at rank #11,708, shown against the 8 assignees closest to it in grant volume rather than the industry's largest filers.

Companies ranked near Lafarge

By rank, the assignees closest to #11,708 in granted patent volume.

Leaders in C04B (LIME)

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

Lafarge's Innovation Score vs. every tracked assignee

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

37 Top 44% higher than 56% 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 · 2015–2018

Grants by year

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

View data table

Lafarge patent grants by year, 2015–2025
Year	Patents Granted	Share of Period
2015	6	23.1%
2016	6	23.1%
2017	5	19.2%
2018	9	34.6%

Which technologies does Lafarge patent most?

C04B - LIME, MAGNESIA; SLAG; CEMENTS; COMPOSITIONS THEREOF, e.g. MORTARS, CONCRETE OR LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS; ARTIFICIAL STONE ; CERAMICS ; REFRACTORIES; TREATMENT OF NATURAL STONE 21

Y02P - CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS 9

Y02W - CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES RELATED TO WASTEWATER TREATMENT OR WASTE MANAGEMENT 8

C01B - NON-METALLIC ELEMENTS; COMPOUNDS THEREOF; ; METALLOIDS OR COMPOUNDS THEREOF NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASS C01C 3

B01J - CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROCESSES, e.g. CATALYSIS OR COLLOID CHEMISTRY; THEIR RELEVANT APPARATUS 2

F27D - DETAILS OR ACCESSORIES OF FURNACES, KILNS, OVENS OR RETORTS, IN SO FAR AS THEY ARE OF KINDS OCCURRING IN MORE THAN ONE KIND OF FURNACE 2

F27B - FURNACES, KILNS, OVENS OR RETORTS IN GENERAL; OPEN SINTERING OR LIKE APPARATUS 2

Y02C - CAPTURE, STORAGE, SEQUESTRATION OR DISPOSAL OF GREENHOUSE GASES [GHG] 2

C01F - COMPOUNDS OF THE METALS BERYLLIUM, MAGNESIUM, ALUMINIUM, CALCIUM, STRONTIUM, BARIUM, RADIUM, THORIUM, OR OF THE RARE-EARTH METALS 2

B01D - SEPARATION 2

B28C - PREPARING CLAY; PRODUCING MIXTURES CONTAINING CLAY OR CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL, e.g. PLASTER 2

E04C - STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS; BUILDING MATERIALS 2

F28D - HEAT-EXCHANGE APPARATUS, NOT PROVIDED FOR IN ANOTHER SUBCLASS, IN WHICH THE HEAT-EXCHANGE MEDIA DO NOT COME INTO DIRECT CONTACT 1

F28C - HEAT-EXCHANGE APPARATUS, NOT PROVIDED FOR IN ANOTHER SUBCLASS, IN WHICH THE HEAT-EXCHANGE MEDIA COME INTO DIRECT CONTACT WITHOUT CHEMICAL INTERACTION 1

E04B - GENERAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS; WALLS, e.g. PARTITIONS; ROOFS; FLOORS; CEILINGS; INSULATION OR OTHER PROTECTION OF BUILDINGS 1

Top 15 of 25 technology areas

Grant record at a glance

Portfolio Volume 26 grants

CPC subclasses 25

Avg. claims / grant 13.8

Velocity -100%

Historical grant data only; it does not rate legal strength or current strategy.

Where it ranks

Overall rank by patents

#11,708

of 50,000 tracked assignees

Innovation Score

37.3 out of 100

View all rankings →

Data Source

USPTO PatentsView, US granted patents 2015–2025

How is Innovation Score calculated?

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does Lafarge rank among US patent assignees?

According to USPTO PatentsView (2015–2025 granted utility patents), Lafarge ranks #11,708 of 50,000 assignees by granted-patent volume, the same sort as the companies listing and top-holders ranking. See /methodology/#corpus-placement.

How many patents does Lafarge hold?

Lafarge holds 26 US utility patents granted between 2015 and 2018, spanning 25 technology areas.

What is Lafarge's Innovation Score?

Lafarge has an Innovation Score of 37.3 out of 100 (top 44% of the corpus). This composite metric weighs portfolio volume (40%), grant velocity (20%), technology breadth (25%), and claim depth (15%).

What technology areas does Lafarge focus on?

Lafarge's top technology area is C04B (LIME, MAGNESIA; SLAG; CEMENTS; COMPOSITIONS THEREOF, e.g. MORTARS, CONCRETE OR LIKE BUILDING MATERIALS; ARTIFICIAL STONE ; CERAMICS ; REFRACTORIES; TREATMENT OF NATURAL STONE) with 21 patents. Grants appear in 25 CPC subclasses total.

Is Lafarge's patent grant rate increasing or decreasing?

Lafarge's recent grant velocity is -100% compared to the prior five-year period (grant years, not application filing dates). Grant activity has slowed relative to earlier years.

What does claim depth mean for Lafarge's patents?

Lafarge's patents average 13.8 claims each. This is an aggregate descriptive count from the grant record; it does not establish claim scope, legal strength, enforceability, or design-around risk.

How is the Lafarge 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

Lafarge's 26 grants land it in the top 44% 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 - Lafarge ranks #11,708 of 50,000. Top 50 holders
Most of this portfolio concentrates in C04B - see who else leads that technology area. C04B 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

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 by PlainPatent, US Patent Intelligence Editorial Process · 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.