Cleantech & Nano Blog

Timely insight on emerging legal and business development

Nanotechnology for Defense Conference: Celebrating Ten Years, Call for Abstracts, and Some History

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Electronic Devices; General

This year is the ten year anniversary for a leading nanotechnology conference, the Nanotechnology for Defense Conference (NT4D).   The call for abstracts indicates a February 18, 2012 initial deadline.  The conference will be held August 6-10 in Summerlin, Nevada.

Defense is one of the fundamental and perhaps the most stable pillar for nanotechnology commercialization, along with other pillars such as bio nanotechnology and energy.  The history of the Department of Defense’s (DoD) interest in nanotechnology is noted in the Foreward of Ratner and Ratner’s book, Nanotechnology and Homeland Security, 2004 (written by James Murday, Office of Naval Research).  The DoD interest in nanotechnology can be “clearly identified as early as the late 1970′s when its Ultrasubmicron Electronics Research (USER) program.”  The DoD had a long history for research in the miniaturization of electronics.  Early efforts focused on 2 nm structures and led to superlattice technologies.  Programs in the 1980′s sought to exploit new tools like STM and AFM.  In the 1990′s, DARPA initiated an ULTRA program for ultra fast, ultra dense electronics program.  In addition, the Office of Naval Research began a program in nanostructured coatings.  By 1997, the importance of nanotechnology to the DOD led to its designation as a “strategic research area.”  When the NNI was created in 2001, the DoD wan an “enthusiastic supporter.”

Note: Murday also has an article in J. Nanoparticle Research, 1, 501-505, 1999 which outlines the history of the DoD and nanotech, and the interests at DoD in 1999.   Focus is on Air Force, Army, Navy, and DARPA.  Information technology, nanomaterials, and nanobiotechnology are discussed.  One cannot do well with current policy decisions without understand some of the history.  Important policy decisions need to be made now in commercialization of nanotechnology.

The current call for abstracts at the 2012 NT4D Conference focus on (1) Nanotechnology Success Stories, (2) Nanotechnology for Military Coatings Applications, (3) Nanotechnology for Chem-Bio Defense and Battlefield Casualty Care Medical Applications, (4) Nanomaterials Response to Extreme Stimuli, and (5) Nanoelectronics.  However, the scope is broad as topics in the following areas will be considered:

Additional topics that will be considered include:

  • Nano-Manufacturing

  • NanoTech for Elimination & Maintenance

  • Nano-Rheology

  • EM Effects on Nanomaterials

  • Nanograined Metals

  • Logistics of Nanotechnology Development

  • Nanomaterials for Energetics

  • Synergistic Experimentation & Computational Modeling

  • Nanoscale Modeling and Simulation

  • Nanodevices

  • Nanosystems

  • Nano-Biotechnology

  • Nanotechnology in Special Ops

  • Beyond CMOS

  • Sustainable Energy

  • Graphene

  • Nanophotonics/MetaMaterials

  • Laser Processing for Materials and Biological Systems

  • Nanomaterials/Nanoceramics/Nanopowders for High-Energy Optics

Domestic Inventing in Hydraulic Fracturing Arts

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleaning Up Hydraulic Fracturing; Cleantech; Patent; Uncategorized; Water

President Obama’s recent State of the Union address spoke of domestic oil and gas industry including shale gas (“American-made energy”).  A leading but controversial technology for this industry is, of course, hydraulic fracturing.  A brief review of the patent literature for 2012 confirms that inventors in this area for US patent filings are largely from the US.  In a global economy, such domestic concentration for inventorship is somewhat unusual.  The concentration of this innovation in the U.S. should be monitored.

As of today, in 2012, 38 patent publications refer to “hydraulic fracturing.”  Of these, 27 (71%) list all U.S. inventors, and 32 (84%) list all U.S. inventors or list a majority of inventors as residing in the U.S.  Only 5 of the 38 (13%) list all non-U.S. inventors.  The leading state for inventors is Texas.

Note, President Obama suggested in his address that public research dollars played a large, critical role in the natural gas boom.  This claim may be exaggerated.  He apparently refers to shale research from the late 1970′s, but that research was largely dropped and the later innovations did not flow from this effort.  Our review of the patent literature indicates relatively little federal funding compared to other sectors of technology.

In general, we would like to see more innovation related to health, safety, and environmental protection, and this would appear to be one area where government funding would seem particularly appropriate.  Only two the patent publications appear to relate to this part of the technology.

Nanoparticles in the Environment – EHS Now Part of Undergraduate Research

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech; EPA; Nanotech Regulation; Water

Interesting example yesterday for how nanotechnology is presented to the public and forming part of our educational systems, including EHS aspects.  We visited Virginia Tech for the day as part of my daughter’s evaluation of prospective colleges.  Our interests included their engineering departments.  In their visitor building, where the tours start, Virginia Tech includes presentation material for several nanotechnology-related issues the university is working on.  One was for how nanoparticles can be transported in the environment over long distances.  The lead professor is in Geosciences, and collaboration is present with civil and environmental engineering professors.   Virginia Tech promotes a “hands-on, minds-on” approach to training its undergrads in engineering, and they indicate that undergraduate research will be part of the project.

Below has more information about the NSF grant on the subject:

Researchers from geosciences and civil and environmental engineering at Virginia Tech are part of a consortium of four principal universities and five other schools awarded a multimillion dollar grant to study nanotechnology and the environment. This is one of only two such consortiums funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) to form a national Center for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology (CEIN). Total funding for the project is $14 million over five years with an opportunity to renew for another five years. Virginia Tech’s portion of the grant is $1.75 million.

Military Leads Early 2012 Funding of Nanotech U.S. Patent Publications

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Patent

2012 is well underway with class 977 nanotech patent publications continuing to issue at high rates.  We have noted the explosive growth of 977 nanotech patenting many times previously.  To date in 2012, 219 patent publications have published in the 977 patent class, which projects early on to about 2,850 patent publications for the year.  While it is too early to project meaningfully for all of 2012, if this pace continues, 2012 will be another year of high rate of nanotech filings and may eclipse last year’s record number (3,439).

The role of government in innovation is a hot topic these days.  Of these class 977 patent publications, 33 (15%) appear to have the federal funding contract clause.  A total of 40 grants are referred to in the clauses.  Defense leads the way with funding of 13 of these grants (33%).  In number two slot was the NSF (12); in number three slot was NIH (9); and pulling up the rear was, surprisingly, Energy with only 6.

The defense funding was broken up among Air Force (5), DARPA (3), Navy (3), and Army (2).  With cuts in defense spending in the news, time will tell if these numbers can be maintained.

Patent Reform Moving Ahead – Debates Continue, PTO Rules Emerging,… Price Outrage?

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech; Patent; U.S. Patent Reform

Two items of note today:

1) The US PTO today finally issued its proposed rules to implement its novel procedure called supplemental examination.  Bad news; and maybe outrage to follow.  They will charge a PTO fee of $5,180.00 “for processing and treating a request for supplemental examination.”  They will also charge a whopping fee of $16,120.00 “for ex parte reexamination ordered as a result of a supplemental examination proceeding.” !

Even more, to file a request for reexamination will cost $17,750.00 in PTO fees.

The public has two months to comment (to express their outrage?).

2) Also, I participated in a panel at American University today on patent reform and post-grant review processes.  I tried to express the need, conveyed by clients, that the complexities of the patent system need to be held in check, particularly for small business innovators.  Now it also appears that costs also appear to be in need of holding in check in the new US PTO.  One can only guess the PTO fees for things like inter partes review or post-grant review.  Numbers like $40,000 were noted on rumor-like basis.

The humor was along the lines of one can buy a nice car with these fees!?

PTO Procedures Under The America Invents Act, March 26, 2012

Posted by Matthew A. Smith on Posted in U.S. Patent Reform

Cleantech & Nano Blog is a proud sponsor of ACI’s “A Practical and Tactical Guide for Maneuvering New and Amended Procedures and Mastering the Intricacies of PTO Practice in the Wake of Patent Reform” forum to be held on March 26 and 27, 2012 in New York City.

Information provided by ACI:

The America Invents Act (AIA) is one of the most sweeping and iconoclastic pieces of legislation in more than half a century. Not only did the AIA reform the basic tenants of the American patent system, but it also lead to the evolution of PTO procedures. Under the AIA’s auspices, some procedures have been amended and others newly created. The AIA has, in essence, created a new type of litigation before the PTO- or more specifically, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) which it also put into being. Patent attorneys representing a variety of industries from nanotechnology – to medical devices – to financial services – to tech and consumer products are now pondering these new and amended procedures and how they will impact current and future strategies.

Continue reading this entry

Innovation, Basic Research, Clean Energy – Obama’s State of the Union Vision

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech; Patent

President Obama delivered his state of the union address tonight. He hit many points of interest to those of us monitoring the high tech ecosystems: innovation, start-ups, basic research, federally-financed labs, universities, clean energy, etc. etc.

Killing cancer cells but leave healthy ones, he said. Sounds like nanotech.

Lightweight vests for cops and soldiers that can stop any bullet, he said. Sounds like advanced materials and/or nanotech.

Curious it was to hear him say that public research dollars were used to develop the technologies to extract natural gas from shale rock. Really? Not sure about that one. We can research more but am dubious from patent literature surveys.

Finally, do not forget his high tech batteries – more nanotech.

Also, the OSTP webpage on the State of Union speech noted more about Dr. Hiroyuki Fujita’s achievements with high tech companies QED and eQED.

The patent system apparently was not stated – a disappointment. Patent system’s regulations in view of reform are increasing heavily these days, which is at odds with his concept to cut regulation. 

Nevertheless, the vision is a good one for cleantech and nanotech.  Time to make it happen; cut through it time. Vision not enough.

DOE Features Ames’ Lead-Free Solder Patent and License Income

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech; Patent

The Department of Energy (DOE) recently featured lead-free solder innovation and licensing from the Ames National Laboratory and Iowa State University. Apparently, $39M of licensing income has been received to date, which makes it now the highest royalty producing patent(s) at Ames. The lead-free compositions are based on tin, silver, and copper mixtures (alloys). 

Preventing the introduction of lead into the environment is an important, classic example of cleantech. I can remember in the 1990′s working on patent technologies for lead-free bullets and lead-free paint. A brief search of granted U.S. patents shows 577 granted patents have “lead-free” in the claim and, even more, 838 granted patents have “lead-free” in the claims. Lead-free technology is a leading example of how environmental concerns can drive innovation. For example, some of the lead-free solders apparently have advantages over the lead-containing solders. Some additional, commercally important lessons from this cleantech story:

  • government regulation, particularly in the European Union in 2006, apparently was a leading factor in increasing the license income;
  • time – roughly a decade – was needed before the licensing income started increasing and maturing;
  • the inventions apparently flowed from basic research efforts;
  • U.S. patents with Ames inventor Iver Anderson related to this technology include US Patent Nos. 5,527,628 and 6,231,691. These patents used the important claim strategy for materials technology, use of “consisting essentially of”;
  • several recent 977 nanotech patent publications show nanoparticle aspects of the technology (see, for example, US Patent Publication 2010/0031848 to Samsung);
  • even though foreign filing apparently was not carried out, licensed from companies outside the U.S. apparently were forthcoming

Cleantech Energy Patent Landscape Report Released

Posted by John M. Lazarus on Posted in Cleantech; Invest; Licensing

Foley’s annual Cleantech Energy Patent Landscape Report provides an analysis of the top clean energy technologies patented in the United States to aid industry executives, start-ups, individual inventors, and investors in identifying trends and market opportunities in this continually changing landscape.

View the executive summary: 

2011 Cleantech Energy Patent Landscape Report Executive Summary 

The Report highlights key findings from a review of more than 1,100 granted U.S. patents specific to clean energy production, efficiency, and conservation technologies within eleven focal categories: solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, biomass, nuclear, hybrid vehicles, fuel cells for vehicles, utility metering, smart grid technologies, and CO2 storage or sequestration. To help participants in this space discern realistic opportunities for sustaining competitive edge and revenue generation, the analysis offers insight on:

  • Regional cleantech activity
  • Year-to-year trend perspective
  • Specific technologies for which patent protection is being granted and who is obtaining those patents 
  • Focal points for venture capital investments 
  • Areas of patentable white space 
  • Potential licensing availability for corporate entities

For more information or a copy of the full annual report, please contact your local Foley attorney or contact me directly at jlazarus@foley.com.

Diamond, One Important Arrow in the 2012 Advanced Materials Arsenal, Patent Efforts Increasing

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech; Nano Biotechnology; Patent; Water

One subject to watch in 2012 is diamond. Synthetic diamond is one important arrow in the arsenal of advanced materials and is an essential part of the carbon based nanomaterials scene including familiar materials in the press such as fullerenes, carbon nanotubes, and graphene. Synthetic diamond films and powders, however, are also an important part of nanotechnology 2012, as it can have grain sizes at the nanoscale. Indeed, class 977 nanotech patent efforts on diamond seems to be increasing. In 2011, a record number of class 977 patent applications – 28 – included diamond in the title or abstract. In 2010, that number was only 18 and the year before was only 11. Some important diamond applications lead to energy savings and better electrodes, so it is also an important material for energy and cleantech. Biosensor applications also exist.

An excellent historical treatment of the development of synthetic diamond technology is Robert M. Hazen’s book, The Diamond Makers, 1999. A major player in the field was General Electric, which continues to this day to be a leading force in advanced materials, nanotech, and cleantech.

In the conception of manufacturing at an atomic, molecular, or nanoscale, inventors and futurists have always thought of building the perfect material: diamond.