Where does UT Brands LLC rank among US patent assignees?

According to USPTO PatentsView (2015–2025 granted utility patents), UT Brands LLC ranks #13,233 of 49,997 assignees by granted-patent volume, the same sort as the companies listing and top-holders ranking. See /methodology/#corpus-placement.

How many patents does UT Brands LLC hold?

UT Brands LLC holds 23 US utility patents granted between 2016 and 2025, spanning 3 technology areas.

What is UT Brands LLC's Innovation Score?

UT Brands LLC has an Innovation Score of 23.9 out of 100 (13th percentile of the corpus). This composite metric weighs portfolio volume (40%), grant velocity (20%), technology breadth (25%), and claim depth (15%).

Is UT Brands LLC's patent grant rate increasing or decreasing?

UT Brands LLC's recent grant velocity is -9% 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 UT Brands LLC's patents?

UT Brands LLC's patents average 3.4 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 UT Brands LLC 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.

USPTO 2015–2025 USPTO PatentsView US Corporation

UT Brands LLC

Q: What technology areas does UT Brands LLC focus on?

UT Brands LLC's top technology area is F41B (Weapons FOR Projecting Missiles Without USE OF Explosive OR Combustible Propellant CHARGE; Weapons NOT Otherwise Provided FOR) with 2 patents, ranking #92 of 154 assignees active in that subclass. Grants appear in 3 CPC subclasses total.

USPTO PatentsView assignee record - 23 granted patents across 3 technology areas, recorded in grant years 2016–2025. 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: F41B (Weapons FOR Projecting Missiles Without USE OF Explosive OR Combustible Propellant CHARGE; Weapons NOT Otherwise Provided FOR).

Compiled by PlainPatent · May 15, 2026

RSS updates for this company

Explore the portfolio See the ranking

The verdict

According to USPTO PatentsView, UT ranks #13,233 of 49,997 tracked US assignees by granted-patent volume, with 23 patents across 3 technology areas.

#13,233
of 49,997 US assignees by volume: 13th percentile
by Innovation Score (23.9/100): 3.4
avg claims per patent: -9%
grant velocity, last 5 yrs

USPTO PatentsView assignee plate

Corpus R13233 · US Corporation #13,233 · 23 grants

GRANTS-SMALL · MID-PACK · PHOTO-FINISH · CPC-NARROW · INNOV-THIN · CLAIMS-SPARSE · TYPE-USCORP · VEL-FLAT · BOOK-FULL

GRANTS-SMALL 23 grants
MID-PACK #13,233/49,997
PHOTO-FINISH Umajin
CPC-NARROW F41B · 3 areas
INNOV-THIN 23.9/100
CLAIMS-SPARSE 3.4 claims/avg
TYPE-USCORP US Corporation
VEL-FLAT -9% vel
BOOK-FULL 10/10 fields

Nearest grant-volume peer: Umajin Inc. (±0 grants)

Instrument codes from this assignee’s USPTO PatentsView grant sheet: volume band, corpus rank, photo-finish peer, lead CPC, Innovation Score, claim depth, assignee type, velocity, and book completeness. Not a USPTO rating of patent strength.

How UT’s 23.9 Innovation Score adds up

The same four weighted components behind every Innovation Score on PlainPatent: portfolio volume, grant velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth.

Volume 11.0 pts (46%) Velocity 4.8 pts (20%) Breadth 6.1 pts (26%) Claim depth 2.0 pts (8%)

Qualcomm Incorporated · highest

85
UT Brands · this assignee

24
3D Lighting… · lowest

7

What this shows UT's Innovation Score is 23.9/100 (13th percentile of the PatentsView-derived corpus). The chart places that score against the nearest Innovation Score peers plus corpus poles, not a reprint of the volume ranking.

Does more volume mean deeper claims for UT?

Each dot is one of UT’s 8 nearest volume peers (same corpus rank neighbourhood as the chart above), placed by total granted patents (horizontal) against average claims per patent (vertical). UT’s own 3.4 claims/patent is at or below the 17.4 median for these volume peers. Volume here does not track with deeper claims; several lower-volume peers claim more thoroughly per patent.

UT vs its 8 nearest volume peers: granted patents vs average claims per patent. Source: USPTO PatentsView.

Where UT's grants concentrate

UT Brands LLC is a focused PatentsView assignee: 3 CPC subclasses with 8.7% of grants classified under F41B (Weapons FOR Projecting Missiles Without USE OF Explosive OR Combustible Propellant CHARGE; Weapons NOT Otherwise Provided FOR). Peak complete grant year is 2017 (5 grants) versus a trough of 1 in 2016. By volume, UT sits between University OF Calcutta and Vaisala OYJ.

UT's three-year grant acceleration

UT Brands LLC shows 5 grants in 2022–2024 against only 7 in 2019–2021. That prior window is too thin for a growth multiple (rename and spin-out assignees look artificially high when the baseline is near zero), so PlainPatent withholds a ranked acceleration claim here.

University OF Cal…

23
University OF Win…

23
UniversitÉ DE Hau…

23
Usui Kokusai Sang…

23
Utechzone

23
Umajin

23
University Colleg…

23
Vaisala OYJ

23
UT Brands ◀

23

What this shows UT holds 23 patents at rank #13,225, shown against the 8 assignees closest to it in grant volume rather than the industry's largest filers.

Companies ranked near UT

By rank, the assignees closest to #13,225 in granted patent volume.

Leaders in F41B (Weapons FOR Projecting Missiles Without USE OF Explosive…)

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

UT's Innovation Score vs. every tracked assignee

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

24 13th percentile higher than 13% of 49,997 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 · 2016–2025

Grants by year

Teal-shaded recent years (2020–present) versus the 2016–2019 baseline. Full figures in the table below.

View data table

UT Brands LLC patent grants by year, 2015–2025
Year	Patents Granted	Share of Period
2016	1	4.3%
2017	5	21.7%
2018	3	13.0%
2019	2	8.7%
2020	5	21.7%
2022	5	21.7%
2025partial year	2	8.7%

Which technologies does UT Brands LLC patent most?

F41B - Weapons FOR Projecting Missiles Without USE OF Explosive OR Combustible Propellant CHARGE; Weapons NOT Otherwise Provided FOR 2

A63H - Toys, e.g. Tops, Dolls, Hoops OR Building Blocks 2

F42B - Explosive Charges, e.g. FOR Blasting, Fireworks, Ammunition 2

Top 3 of 3 technology areas

More on this record

Data Source

USPTO PatentsView, US granted patents 2015–2025

View all rankings → How is Innovation Score calculated?

What to do with this data

UT Brands LLC's patent record in context - here's where to go next.

UT Brands LLC's lead technology class is F41B (Weapons FOR Projecting Missiles Without USE OF Explosive OR Combustible Propellant CHARGE; Weapons NOT Otherwise Provided FOR), 8.7% of its portfolio - see every assignee active in that class. Explore F41B
Ranked #13,233 of 49,997 tracked assignees by patent volume - see the full leaderboard. See the ranking
Compare UT Brands LLC against University OF Calcutta, an assignee filing at a similar volume. Compare portfolios
Innovation Score of 23.9/100 blends volume, velocity, technology breadth, and claim depth. How it's calculated

Figures reflect USPTO PatentsView grant data through May 2026; pending applications not yet granted are not counted.

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.