CPC technology class · A63

A63D — Bowling Games

Bowling games, e.g. skittles, bocce or bowls; installations therefor; bagatelle or similar games; billiards. 78 US utility patents granted 2015–2025, with the leading assignees and year-by-year filing trajectory.

78
US patents granted
A63
Parent CPC class
9
Active assignees
+23%
5-yr velocity

The verdict

Bowling Games ranks #629 of 670 CPC technology areas — 78 US patents granted since 2015, with filing up 23% over five years.

#629
of 670 CPC technology areas
78
US patents granted, 2015–2025
Qubicaamf Europe S P A
leading assignee (6)
+23%
filing velocity, last 5 yrs
Top assignee: QUBICAAMF EUROPE S.P.A. (6 patents)

CPC subclass A63D — BOWLING GAMES, e.g. SKITTLES, BOCCE OR BOWLS; INSTALLATIONS THEREFOR; BAGATELLE OR SIMILAR GAMES; BILLIARDS — covers 78 US utility patents granted between 2015 and 2025 according to USPTO PatentsView records. This subclass sits within the broader CPC class A63 (SPORTS; GAMES; AMUSEMENTS), one of roughly 250 top-level technology categories in the Cooperative Patent Classification system jointly maintained by the USPTO and the European Patent Office. At the subclass level, four-character codes like A63D give the most practical resolution for tracking a specific technology domain without losing sight of adjacent filings. Every grant here has been classified by a USPTO examiner based on the technical disclosure in the patent specification.

The competitive landscape in A63D is shaped by 9 distinct companies actively filing in this space. QUBICAAMF EUROPE S.P.A. leads with 6 patents, followed by QUBICAAMF EUROPE S.P.A. at 6 grants and Kegel, LLC at 3. Concentration at the top of the leaderboard indicates whether this technology area is dominated by a handful of incumbents or fragmented across many filers — a useful signal for investors evaluating competitive moats and for product teams mapping freedom-to-operate risk.

Filing trajectory matters as much as static counts. The yearly series on this page plots grants from 2015 through 2025, highlighting whether innovation in A63D is accelerating, plateauing, or cooling. Technology areas with rising post-2020 activity often reflect emerging markets or new platform shifts, while declining filings can signal mature domains where incremental improvement has slowed. Researchers, licensing professionals, and competitive-intelligence teams use these patterns — together with the top-assignee distribution — to decide where to invest, where to license, and where to avoid entanglement. All counts on this page come directly from USPTO PatentsView and reflect US granted utility patents only.

Is A63D innovation accelerating?

US utility-patent grants per year in A63D, 2015–2025 — recent five years are up 23% versus 2015–2019.

2468101214 20152016201720182019202020212022202320242025 7

Who leads A63D?

The 12 most active assignees in BOWLING GAMES, e.g. SKITTLES, BOCCE OR BOWLS; INSTALLATIONS THEREFOR; BAGATELLE OR SIMILAR GAMES; BILLIARDS — wider bars mean more grants

patents

What this shows Qubicaamf Europe S P A is the most active filer in A63D, holding 6 of the 78 patents in this class. Concentration at the top signals how contestable this technology area is for new entrants.

Source USPTO PatentsView — granted utility patents As of 2015–2025 grant years
View data table

About This Class

CPC subclass A63D belongs to class A63.

78 patents were granted in this class between 2015 and 2025.

9 companies actively patent in this space.

Classification System

Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) is a hierarchical patent classification system used by the USPTO and EPO.

Footprint here vs. claim strategy

Each dot is a leading A63D assignee, placed by how many patents it holds in this class (horizontal) against its company-wide average claims per patent (vertical) — a read on whether the class is led by broad-but-shallow filers or focused deep-claim players.

Top 9 A63D assignees by class footprint. Bubble size = patents in A63D. Source: USPTO PatentsView (claim depth is company-wide across all classes).

Top 9 A63D assignees by class footprint. Bubble size = patents in A63D. Source: USPTO PatentsView (claim depth is company-wide across all classes). Scatter plot of 9 data points (bubble-sized by third dimension). 0510152025 02468 Patents in A63D Avg claims / patent (company-wide) Smart Billiard Lighti…Qubicaamf Europe S P AKegelBrunswick Bowling Pro…Ao Kaspersky LabWilliams-sonomaDick's Sporting GoodsTrinity International…Qubicaamf Worldwide
Top 9 A63D assignees by class footprint. Bubble size = patents in A63D. Source: USPTO PatentsView (claim depth is company-wide across all classes).

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CPC class A63D?
CPC subclass A63D covers BOWLING GAMES, e.g. SKITTLES, BOCCE OR BOWLS; INSTALLATIONS THEREFOR; BAGATELLE OR SIMILAR GAMES; BILLIARDS. It belongs to CPC class A63 (SPORTS; GAMES; AMUSEMENTS). The Cooperative Patent Classification is a hierarchical system used by the USPTO and European Patent Office to categorize patents by technology.
How many patents have been filed in A63D?
78 US utility patents were granted in CPC subclass A63D between 2015 and 2025, based on USPTO PatentsView data.
Which company holds the most patents in A63D?
QUBICAAMF EUROPE S.P.A. leads A63D with 6 patents, making it the most active assignee in this technology area.
How is patent data for A63D collected?
Patent data comes from USPTO PatentsView, a public research dataset maintained by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. It covers all US granted utility patents and assigns CPC codes based on the technology described in each patent.
What is the difference between CPC class and subclass?
A CPC class (e.g., A63) is a broad technology category. Subclasses like A63D provide finer granularity within that category. PlainPatent organizes data at the subclass level (4-character codes) for the most useful view of technology domains.

Learn More

Explore the patent dataset

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