Cleantech & Nano Blog Timely insight on emerging legal and business development

Tag Archives: Cleantech Patent Landscape Report

Cleantech Energy Patent Landscape Report Released

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.

GE and Wind Turbine Patenting: A Fortress Emerging as a Real Cleantech Story of the Year?

Posted in Cleantech; Patent

I was pleasantly surprised to see that the Department of Energy web page today featured use of wind power in my hometown area, Lancaster County Pennsylvania. Two new wind power units were installed in early 2011. Built by GE.  They can be observed when driving into the county, crossing the river. Subject of discussion over Thanksgiving dinner.

That led me to think about wind power in Pennsylvania more generally. After all, we regularly see the wind turbines off the PA turnpike in Somerset, PA. An ounce of research indicated, again, built by GE. First installed October 2001. 

Then, thinking more, I recalled the US PTO announcement this past fall about GE’s extensive use of the greentech accelerated examination program. GE was awarded the 500th patent in the program for – you guessed it – wind power technology. See my October 17, 2011 post. GE had at that time 116 greentech patents.

In 2011, a brief patent search showed 210 patents have issued assigned to GE on the cover that refer to wind turbines! That is a lot. Putting that in context is the fact that last year, 2010, saw only 85 such GE patents, and the year before, 2009, saw only 41 such GE patents (2008 was 52; 2007 was 30; and 2006 was only 21). That is also called “building a patent fortress.”

Much hot, bitter, and salty press in 2011 about cleantech companies flailing and failing like Solyndra. Perhaps that is not the real cleantech story of the year.

Reminder: USPTO’s Inaugural Clean Technology Partnership Meeting

Posted in Cleantech

The USPTO will host its first Clean Technology Partnership Meeting on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 in an effort to bring clean technology leaders together to share insights and ideas and provide perspective on how the USPTO can expand its clean technology programs. Foley’s J. Steven Rutt, Chair of the Nanotechnology Industry Team and member of the Green Energy Technologies Team, will moderate the forum and lead a discussion on cleantech innovation, sharing insights from the firm’s soon-to-be released 2011 Annual Cleantech Patent Landscape Report.

Additional speakers include:

  • Bruce Kisliuk, Assistant Deputy Commissioner for Patents, Mechanical Disciplines, USPTO
  • Jacqueline Stone, Group Director TC 1600, USPTO
  • Neil Feltham, Senior Patent Counsel, DuPont
  • William S. Elias, General Counsel, UChicago Argonne, LLC
  • Mike Nelson, Chief Technology Officer, NanoInk, Inc.
  • Alan Brown, Executive Director, Pennsylvania NanoMaterials Commercialization Center

The meeting will be held at USPTO Headquarters in Alexandria, Va., from 1:00-5:00 p.m. To confirm your attendance, please RSVP to Jill Warden at: jill.warden@uspto.gov or (571) 272-1267. Space is limited. For additional details, please visit the USPTO Website.

 

Biofuel Developments: Government Support Continues; Patent Activity Exploding

Posted in Cleantech

Biofuels and biomass technology continue to be hot in the cleantech sector this year.

The Obama Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture continue to promote advanced biofuels and now, in an effort to craft useful policy, they welcome comments from the public. See April 19, 2010 developments wherein the federal government is receiving public comments for three biofuel loan guarantee and payment programs.

Additionally, the patent filings in the area are increasingly substantial. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent publication program began in 2001 and with that came a start-up period for all the applications to be published. While the success of patents in this area of technology took several years to gain traction, the past couple years have seen double and even triple increases as reflected in the data below.

Continue reading this entry

Recent Nanotech Patent Trends: Top Ten Observations

Posted in Cleantech; Patent

While the snowfall may have closed the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) for a fourth day in a row, a fresh crop of patents have issued again as happens each Tuesday. Many of these patents are vital to the future of nanotechnology and cleantech. Below are my top 10 patent observations based on a brief review of the most current PTO data available online.

Starting with the last, but not the least: 

10. The PTO has now classified 5,909 patents as being under Class 977 as nanotechnology patents. This number continues to grow solidly. As highlighted in our posting Update on USPTO Nanotechnology Class 977 in August 2009, the number of 977 patents then was only 5,594. So over 300 nano patents have been granted in six months, which is higher than average (typically, the annual number of granted nano patents is only 250 – 500 patents per year).

Continue reading this entry

Hybrid Vehicle Patents Provide Corporations Room to Maneuver

Posted in Cleantech; Patent

- By Matthew Swietlik & John Lazarus

Among 589 patents issued in 2008 across nine categories studied in Foley’s Cleantech Patent Landscape Report, hybrid vehicles accounted for 113, or over 19 percent. Corporate entities accounted for over 96 percent of hybrid vehicle patents issued in 2008, while individual inventors accounted for only about 3.5 percent of hybrid vehicle patents. 

Continue reading this entry

Individual Inventors Lead the Flow in Hydropower Patents

Posted in Cleantech; Patent

 - By John Lazarus

Collectively, individual inventors accounted for the vast majority of all hydropower (i.e., hydro, wave and tidal power) patents granted in the U.S. during 2008 (28 of 38 total U.S. patents granted – almost 74 percent). All other corporations or entities each accounted for less than three percent. These patents may represent an area of interest for corporations looking to enhance, or enter, the hydropower field by acquiring or licensing the rights to new hydropower technologies.

Continue reading this entry

Wind Energy Patents Sail Through the USPTO in 2008

Posted in Cleantech

 - By John Lazarus

Research provided via Foley’s Cleantech Patent Landscape Report reflects that the percentage of patents for wind energy inventions that were granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) in 2008 without any initial rejection in view of “prior art” patents was higher for wind energy inventions than any other field in the cleantech patent landscape. More than 25 percent (37 of 144 total) of all wind energy patents were granted by the PTO in 2008 as “first action allowances,” i.e., with no initial rejection by the PTO examiners based upon their search of preceding patents and other prior art documents. 

Continue reading this entry