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

Tag Archives: NNI

From Visioneers to 3D Printing – Where is Nanotech Going?

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Book Reviews; Patent

Another interesting nanotechnology book recently appeared, The Visioneers, by W. Patrick McCray, 2013, 323 pages, $29.95 hardback at Barnes & Noble (“How a group of elite scientists pursued space colonies, nanotechnologies, and a limitless future”). One focus in this book is on the history of nanotechnology up to around 2004, including the role of Eric Drexler and Richard Smalley and their famous debate. The origin of the NNI is briefly covered. The multiple strands of nanotechnology are explored, ranging from futuristic concepts to advanced materials science for making products now. Tensions between different nanotech philosophies and groups are explored. Good read, although it would have been interesting if more content had been provided for after 2004. Also, nanotechnology is only one of two conveyed stories of visioneering.

Also, 3D printing seems to be the rage these days in the technical and general media. The USPTO will hold a special session on 3D printing on January 23,2013. The 3D printing company ExOne is announcing an IPO attempt. In 3D printing, thin layers are built on one another. Nanotechnology connects in the materials used for 3D printing, as well as the notion of making thinner and thinner layers. Where is nanotechnology going? It is impacting personalized medicine and energy. 

Clearly, one visioneering answer also now arising is in 3D printing.

Nanotechnology: “What About the Next 60 Years?” (OSTP/PCAST Report)

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

PCAST recently submitted a very interesting, readable, and searchable report to the OSTP on federal policy for the future of basic research funding and commercialization (124 page pdf).  Nanotechnology was mentioned on page 22 as an example of benefits of basic research including its influence on energy:

“-Nanotechnology research, on the heels of coordinated Federal investment, is leading to advances in areas such as new drug delivery systems, more resilient materials and fabrics, safer and more effective industrial catalysts, faster computer chips, and sustainable development in water and energy resources.”

Nanotechnology also appeared on page 45 with respect to discussion of university “proof-of-concept” centers:

“-The (MIT) Deshpande Center supports emerging technologies, including biotechnology, biomedical devices, information technology, new materials, nanotechnology, and energy innovations. It sponsors a grant program, a catalyst (mentor) program, innovation teams (i-Teams), and events.”

Finally, nanotechnology was mentioned on page 80 with respect to attracting researchers from abroad to come to the U.S.

Commercialization, patents, and technology transfer are important themes mentioned throughout.  Nanotechnology is but one of a variety of “labels” used to describe sectors of research for policy analysis.  Nanotechnology integrates closely with many of these other “labels.”  Hopefully, its importance will not be lost in the integration.

 

Updates With Materials Genome Initiative, $25M Grants Announced; Complex IP Issues?

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General; Licensing; Patent

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) recently announced updates with the Materials Genonme Initiative (MGI). $25M in grants are noted, and the awardees include universities, national laboratories, and private sector companies (e.g., GM). Collaboration continues to be a strong theme.

Collaboration usually sounds good and makes sense in many contexts, particularly for purely basic research with long-term visions. However, collaborations can also generate complicated intellectual property and patent issues. For shorter term research with commercial applications as a goal, this can become a problem if not managed well. Hopefully, the MGI is considering this aspect of this new, exciting commercialization program. The MGI is now about 1 1/2 years old. The MGI has many close links to nanotechnology and the NNI (National Nanotechnology Initiative) including a program for predicting the properties of nanomaterials. Hopefully, the MGI is well and efficiently integrated with the NNI.

Also, hopefully 2013 budget issues do not slow down the MGI. Stay tuned.

Lamar Smith New Chair of House Committee on Science, Space and Technology; Impact on NNI?

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

In a move which could favorably impact the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), House Congressional Republicans recently selected Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) to chair the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Rep. Smith has been a supporter of nanotechnology, having sponsored legislation such as HR 5940 to improve the National Nanotechnology Initiative. A statement released by Rep. Smith on his Web site reads as follows:

Chairman Smith:

“As Chairman of the Science Committee, I will be an advocate for America’s innovators by promoting legislation that encourages scientific discoveries, space exploration, and the application of new technologies to expand our economy and create jobs for American workers.

“Over 80% of the Committee’s $39 billion budget touches on research and development. We can’t have innovation without research and development. And the purpose of the Science Committee is to encourage the R&D that leads to new innovations.

“The Science Committee can play an exciting part in the discoveries of science, the exploration of space and the development of new technologies. I appreciate the confidence of my colleagues and look forward to chairing the Committee next Congress.”

House Speaker John Boehner supported Smith’s appointment.

Speaker Boehner:

“Throughout his tenure on the House Judiciary Committee, Lamar has been a strong leader on important issues facing the American people. He is dedicated to promoting economic growth to help put Americans back to work, encouraging innovation and promoting national security. I am confident that he will bring the same strong leadership and work ethic to the Science Committee as Chairman, and I look forward to working with him in the 113th Congress.”

Established in 1958, the Science, Space and Technology Committee has jurisdiction over all non-defense federal scientific research and development. Specifically, the Committee has partial or complete jurisdiction over the following federal agencies: NASA, the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, the Federal Aviation Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, FEMA, the U.S. Fire Administration, and United States Geological Survey, among others.

The Committee has five subcommittees – the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education, the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, and the Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation.

As chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Smith has spearheaded the patent-reform legislation known as the America Invents Act. He has also worked to increase opportunities for foreign graduates with science and engineering degrees to remain in the United States.

High Throughput, Inexpensive DNA Sequencing Hitting Main Stream Media (Secret Killer App for Nanotech)

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Electronic Devices; Nano Biotechnology; Patent; Uncategorized

Good to see: high throughput, inexpensive DNA sequencing is being featured on NPR this week in a series entitled the $1,000 Genome. Many of the technologies for this revolution in sequencing, of course, relate closing to or directly are nanotechnology (e.g., nanopore, microfluidic, and/or lab-on-a-chip technologies). Personalized medicine depends on it. More generally, the interface between biology and electronics is one of the most compelling arguments for further development and commercialization of nanotechnology and, more particularly, bio nanotechnology. Another leading example is allowing partially blind or blind persons to see better with artificial retinas.

A brief check of the nanotechnology class 977 patent literature shows IBM has activity in this area. See, for example, their recent US patent publications 2012/0199483 (published August 9, 2012); 2012/0193237 (published August 2, 2012); 2011/0308949 (December 22, 2011); and 2011/0279125 (November 17, 2011).

Hopefully, angel and venture capital investment will also flow to these exciting areas. This appears to be turning out to be one of many virtually secret “killer apps” for nanotech. For example, the NPR series does not delve too much into how the sequencing is done (per the series, sequencing done in a ”black box”). Hopefully, despite the secrecy, the federal and state governments, including those who fund and run the NNI, are watching.

Patent Reform Marches on to Critical Dates of September 16, 2012 and March 16, 2013, as Patents Again Make Front Page Headlines

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

The recent, large judgement against Samsung in the Apple v. Samsung patent litigation has again brought patenting to the front pages of American news media. In that context, the September 16, 2012 and March 16, 2013 critical dates for when fundamentally new patent law takes effect takes on added importance. It is crucial for the innovation community to master the new patent law and PTO regulations. We will be presenting a timely panel discussion Wednesday morning September 5, 2012 in Boston regarding updates in patent reform including critical topics such as the new first-to-file system, what remains of any “grace period,” Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, and the like. The panel is part of the Nanomanufacturing Summit 2012 in combination with the annual meeting for the NanoBusiness Commercialization Association.

We stress, in particular, that while the March 16, 2013 date for the start of the first-to-file system seems a “long way away” today, it is not. Innovators need to plan now to adopt procedures and patent programs so as to be ready for March 16, 2013 (i.e., need to hit the ground running!).

NNI’s Sensors: New Federal Nanosensor Initiative Announced

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech; Electronic Devices; General; Licensing; Nano Biotechnology; Patent; Uncategorized

The NNI is now presenting to the public a new signature initiative devoted to sensors. Two thrusts are identified: (1) use of nanotechnology in building sensors, and (2) develop better sensing methods for detecting nanomaterials. An associated white paper provides more details.

This is the fifth signature initiative from the NNI. According to the announcement, past sensor work has been held back due to problems with lack of reliability, reproducibility, and robustness. Sensors apply to a broad spectrum of industries, including energy, health, and defense. Certainly, after 9-11, sensors were identified as a key technology associated with homeland defense. Hence, federal thrusts in this sector would seem to make sense.

Some references to commercialization are present. For example, the announcement refers to US Patent No. 7,889,954 as an example of the type of technology upon which they want to build (from the Sailor group at University of San Diego). However, as if often the case with the federal government announcements, the commercialization issues at stake lack detail. For example, no patent studies are noted as part of what is important commercially in work to date. No analysis of the Bayh-Dole system in this sector or of the history of licensing or venture funding for sensor technology is noted. Brief reference to nanomanufacturing is noted (nanomanufacturing is another NNI signature initiative).

The ’954 patent, according to PTO records, is assigned to University of California and the federal government, jointly. Federal money apparently was used to develop the invention. The patent abstract for this patent is below:

An embodiment of the invention is a remote sensor that has an optical fiber terminating in a tip. A thin film porous particle having a characteristic optical response that changes in the presence of an analyte is optically coupled and physically attached to the tip of the optical fiber. The optical response of the particle changes in the presence of analyte, and the particle also serves to concentrate analyte. The thin film porous particle can be functionalized toward sensitivity for a predetermined analyte or analytes. A method of remote sensing exposes the remote sensor to an environment to be monitored for analyte. The thin film porous particle is probed with a beam of light. Reflected light is monitored through the optical fiber for a shift in frequency or intensity.

Predicting the Properties of Nanomaterials: Nanotech Moving Ahead

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General; Press Release

The Materials Genome Initiative received a boost this week when the OSTP (Office of Science Technology Policy) announced important updates. Several of these relate directly to nanotechnology.

For example, the NNI (National Nanotechnology Initiative) has now set fourth its fourth signature initiative, called Nanotechnology Knowledge Infrastructure (NKI). A key aspect of NKI is predicting the properties of nanomaterials. The prior three initiatives related to nanomanufacturing, nanosolar, and nanoelectronics.

In addition, Lockheed Martin is leading a new carbon nanostructure consortium.

Hopefully, concrete action will flow from these important updates, in contrast to mere “bureaucratic shuffling” or “talking for the sake of talking.” Private sector involvement, reflected in the Lockheed work, is critical. Good to see executive action (or at least action from the executive branch). More information can be found in this link and also this other link.

President’s Proposed Budget Provides 4.1% Increase for NNI: Energy Way Up; Defense Way Down

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleaning Up Hydraulic Fracturing; Cleantech; EPA; Licensing

We have been reviewing the President’s budget proposals announced yesterday, February 13, 2012 (fiscal year 2013 President’s Budget). In particular, we are looking at impact on nanotech and cleantech. Some highlights:

First, the NNI was given a 4.1% increase (NNI is National Nanotechnology Initiative). The total would rise to $1.8B.

Second, within the NNI heavy cuts are slated for defense, including  DOD (down 20%) and Homeland Security (down 14%).

Third, within the NNI, heavy increases are proposed for Energy (up 40%) and the EPA (up 12%).

Interesting that in the webinar provided explaining the rationale, a research program can be cut for failure for lack of good future prospects. Alternatively, however, a research program can be cut if it is commercially successful and transitioning to the private sector. Hence, the input from government is for those programs in the middle.

The webinar also featured the administration continues to assert that the federal government had a major impact over the past thirty years on shale gas developments.

NNI has Two News Postings in October – More Needed

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Cleantech

It was good to see the NNI webpage www.nano.gov post two news releases in October. This was the first month that two were posted in one month. To date, six have been posted in 2011. More are needed.

Nanotechnology is critical to many areas of technology development including energy, medicine, life sciences, advanced materials, catalysis, sensors, and the like. Hopefully, more NNI news will be posted.

A review of other webpages such as the OSTP webpage, the Department of Energy webpage, and the general NanoWerk webpage confirm there is much to write about on nanotech and government-related research and commercialization.

Updates in NanoEHS

Posted by Sarah A. Slack on Posted in Nanotech Regulation

NNI’s Website, www.nano.gov, is showing some additional activity that may indicate the site is finally awake and active for good. NNI posted four reports today that are the products of a series of workshops the government hosted in 2009 and 2010. 

According to NNI, the workshops that were the basis for these reports, in conjunction with advice from National Academies and the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), were used to develop an updated EHS Research Strategy for the NNI, which is intended to guide the responsible development of nanotechnology.

Continue reading this entry

NNI’s Nano.gov Finally Back and Being Updated

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General

The NNI’s nano.gov website was finally – after two months – updated this week with a White House press release on President Obama’s visit to Carnegie Mellon University and announcements re Advanced Manufacturing programs (AMP). It was good to see the webpage back in action. Earlier this year, OSTP’s Travis Earles (who has since left for an industry position) had told audiences how the webpage was finally being upgraded after a long wait. The site was upgraded, true, but then promptly stopped being updated (the last news update was April 25, 2011). Hopefully, if NNI is to thrive and drive a better future, the updates will be frequent, certainly more frequent that every other month.

The Department of Energy, in a move related to AMP, announced recent manufacturing job training initiatives.

Nanotech 977 Patent Filings Remains Strong; Updating the NNI Web Page

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Patent

We have commented before about the rapid rise of nanotech 977 patenting (see our May 27, 2011 blog entry, for example).  This past week (June 9, 2011), a large number, 78, of new patent applications published under the 977 nanotech classification, which again validates the proposition that nanotech patenting is increasing.  I continue to be impressed by the diverse applications and the diverse applicants.

Too bad that the www.nano.gov web page covering the NNI does not seem to be updated much these days (last news continues to be April 25, 2011).  Five of the 78 patents had a government funding clause - I know the government is interested in what is getting patented with its funds as an indicator of commercialization trends.  Time to update the NNI web page???

Japan, S. Korea, and Germany Lead in Nanotech Patenting for Non-USA Countries

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in Patent

From the beginnings of the NNI, the "race" between the industrialized countries to develop nanotechnology was a focus point. The U.S. NNI was seen as a catalyst for this race which spread internationally. For example, M.C. Roco authored an early, seminal article on the NNI and spoke of the United States having a nanotechnology "powerhouse of discoveries and inventions" (J. Nanoparticle Research, 6: 1-10, 2004). Patenting is one measure for who is "winning" this race. Hence, 10 years later, we surveyed the current set of 977 granted nanotech U.S. patents for 10 countries (the 977 nanotech patent count now stands at 6,880 as of May 2, 2011).

Following the United States, Japan clearly leads the pack with 2,360 points in our counting system. S. Korea is a distant second with 665 points, and Germany comes in at number three with 565 points. A second group was Taiwan (323 points), France (294 points), Canada (277 points), and Great Britain (174 points). The third group with the fewest included China (146), Italy (94), and Australia (55).

Continue reading this entry

Obama, Chu, and “Nanotechnology” – More Needed?

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General

I had the pleasure last week of listening to Steven Chu’s speech at the "NNI at Ten" event in Washington DC. Some, I have heard, were disappointed in his speech for delivering "old" material and not saying too much about the commercialization and the policies associated with nanotech. I certainly had noted he focused on more technical issues, demonstrating his ability to comprehend nanotech. He did not intend apparently to inspire us with high volume enthusiasm. Nevertheless, I was pleased that he participated in the NNI at Ten event.

Since President Obama came to the front of the national scene over the past several years, I have noticed he does not use the term "nanotechnology" much in his speeches and dialog with the press. Perhaps I have missed it, but I have noted that for some time now and ongoing, occasional google searches seem to confirm my note (feel free to send me examples if you know of them). He certainly makes plenty of references to clean technology, biotechnology, and other technologies – so why not nanotechnology? As the NNI at Ten event confirmed, the federal government continues to spend billions on the nanotech effort including responsible research on the environmental, health, and safety aspects of nanotech. Nanotech needs for Obama (and Chu) to not just coordinate nanotech research funding in a ‘behind the scenes" mode, but also champion the cause publicly. More is needed.

NNI Meeting Concludes: Bring on the Next Ten Years !

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General

The Ten Year NNI Nanotech conference concluded today in Washington D.C. I had to leave mid-day but – summing up the conference – it was hard to leave. 

Today, for example, Francis Collins spoke about the NIH view on nano, as did the leader of NIST. No other event has pulled together so much "firepower" on nanotechnology in one forum. Congratulations to the organizers of the event for this success. Attendance and energy was strong.

More will be written in this forum about this conference, and likely www.nano.gov will post slides.

To comprehend this, one has to just think back 10 years ago, then 20 years ago, then 30 years ago. When did you first use a personal computer? When did you first buy a cell phone? When did you first surf the web? When did you first start emailing regularly? When did you first google search on a device which fits in your pocket? When did you…well you get the point. Nanotech is right there in our technology revolution, helping to miniaturize our IT.

Problems with venture capital and technology transfer will need to be addressed. If these issues are better dealt with, nanotech will accelerate even more!

Nanotech NNI Conference, Day Two: Nanotech Advances After the Hype Phase

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General

Today’s conference in Washington D.C. on the "NNI at Ten" theme continued into a second day, attracting hundreds (likely well over 500 persons). One main theme linking together many inputs was that nanotech is advancing steadily following a hype and bubble bursting phase which often plagues technical innovation. Over twenty speakers presented on what they believe is important about nanotech and the NNI, with speakers ranging from academic, to the government, to startup companies, and to large behemoth companies. Many noted that public perception of nanotechnology is important for allowing this technology to continue to advance.

Continue reading this entry

Nanotech’s Signature Initiatives: Solar, Nanomanufacturing, and Nanoelectronics are Good but where is Nano Biotechnology?

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General

The NNI’s draft strategic plan is available now at www.nano.gov. One of the most interesting aspects of the report (about 40 pages) is the set of three "signature initiatives" near the end, which include:

(1) Nanotechnology for Solar Energy Collection and Conversion

(2) Sustainable Nanomanufacturing – Creating the Industries of the Future

(3) Nanoelectronics for 2020 and Beyond

Continue reading this entry

More on the NNI at the Ten Year Point: Applications!

Posted by J. Steven Rutt on Posted in General

Nature magazine recently reviewed nanotechnology and the NNI at the ten year point, a subject we have been blogging about this past year. Themes include past emphasis on basic research and the applications for the coming decade.

Our September 27, 2010 panel at the NanoBusiness Alliance Conference in Chicago (2 p.m.) will include discussion of these and other points related to nanotech commercialization.

For life sciences and cleantech to bloom, they must include substantial nanotech. Nanotech funding in the NNI is not a "boondoggle" – as some have incorrectly suggested based on short term analysis - but a wise look to the future!  It is an essential element of the recognized triangle including biotech, IT, and nanotech. Better systems will be needed, however, for commercialization and technology transfer.

We hope you can join us and welcome your comments!