Author: Marie Powers

Given the importance of angel investment to start-ups, university tech transfer professionals had best pay attention as financial reform moves through the U.S. Congress, according to Robert E. Litan, vice president of research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, MO. Sec. 926 of the comprehensive financial reform bill, unveiled on March 15 by Senate Banking Committee Chair Christopher Dodd (D-CT), contains onerous provisions that would deter start-up companies from seeking angel investments, Litan maintains. In an opinion piece published in the Huffington Post, he warns that the bill would raise the costs of seeking angel investment and require start-ups seeking angel investors to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which would have 120 days to review the request. Currently, start-ups can raise money from accredited angel investors quickly, without state or regulatory approvals. The Dodd provisions also would double the net worth or income thresholds for investors to be “accredited.” The provisions “are both unnecessary and unhelpful at a time when policymakers should be looking for ways to make it easier to finance new businesses, especially the potentially high-growth, job-creating companies capable of attracting outside investors,” Litan writes.

However, commenting on the Entrepreneur Daily Dose blog, writer Carol Tice suggests that requiring entrepreneurs to file with the SEC before they seek angel funds might have two beneficial effects. Entrepreneurs would work harder on their business plans, financials, and projections to meet SEC requirements, she points out. In addition, such a requirement would produce “a sort of winnowing effect where flakier businesses would fall out of the running, leaving a clearer field for stronger concepts to connect with angels,” Tice says.

Sources:  Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and Entrepreneur.com

Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) spinoff DeltaPoint, Inc., was selected as the overall launch-stage winner in the annual Angel Oregon event hosted by the Oregon Entrepreneurs Network. The company took home a $170,000 angel investment prize. DeltaPoint is commercializing diagnostic software developed at OHSU’s Advanced Imaging Research Center that is designed to noninvasively detect, diagnose, and monitor breast cancer using a novel algorithm to analyze the results of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The technology is the first MRI software that can reliably differentiate benign from malignant tumors, according to DeltaPoint, which plans to expand the platform to address other forms of cancer. The technology licensed to DeltaPoint was supported by a grant from OHSU’s Bioscience Innovation Program (BSIP), which “is one of a growing number of gap funding programs created by universities across the country to speed the commercialization of university inventions,” explains Kristin Rencher, director of technology development in OHSU’s Office of Technology Transfer and Business Development.

Source: Media-Newswire and Xconomy

It is a common problem in technology transfer offices, where there’s always more technology to manage than managers to shepherd those technologies along. Some innovations get more scrutiny than others, and even those with obvious promise tend to amble down the field in an unpredictable fashion. Deals can get done in this kind of environment, but it’s hardly a blueprint for optimal productivity. That, at least, was the conclusion of administrators in the Office for Technology Commercialization (OTC) at the University of Minnesota (UM), who decided to look for a way to bring more standardization to the way they review technologies and move them through the commercialization pipeline.

The OTC has adopted the stage-gate process, reports Leza Besemann, MS, a technology strategy manager at UM. The approach that is widely used in industry to funnel new ideas

through a series of established stages or gates before they get to the point where a product is ready for launch. A detailed article on the model, including a flow chart depicting each of the stages, appears in the March issue of Technology Transfer Tactics. To subscribe and access the full article, along with three years of archived back issues filled with best practices and expert guidance for tech transfer professionals, CLICK HERE.

A 1955 essay in The Economist opened with the famous proclamation, “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” This observation could refer to “staffing” as well as “time,” according to Michael N. Rader, a patent attorney and litigator with the Boston-based IP law firm Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, PC. Keeping your legal team small is the surest way to control the cost of any matter, including a patent case, Rader says. In fact, most patent cases can be handled successfully with a team of two to three lawyers and a paralegal. “A lean team makes budgeting easier,” he points out. “Calculate the billings of the team based on their hourly rates, the expected activity in a particular month or quarter given the case schedule, and the estimated proportion of each attorney’s time that is available for the case.”

Here are Rader’s additional suggesting for controlling patent litigation costs:

• Prepare a detailed quarterly or monthly case budget as soon as the court enters a scheduling order. Revisit and update the case budget every month or two as the case progresses. While the distribution of billing over time may evolve — for example, savings may be achieved early in the case due to deferrals of work that will occur later — the overall cost should remain the same absent a game-changing event.
• Enter time promptly and check the billing at the middle and end of each month to ensure the case remains within budget. If the team is in danger of exceeding a monthly budget, take corrective steps. “Litigation billing should not involve surprises,” Rader says.
• Use common sense. Patent litigators should read every patent-related decision of the Federal Circuit within days of its issuance — and not on the client’s nickel. Check billings to make sure you’re not being charged for the basics of keeping current.  Preferably, the entire firm or patent group should meet regularly to discuss the more important cases. “These practices ensure that attorneys are up to speed on the current state of the law and don’t need to burn a lot of time figuring out which arguments will work in court,” Rader says.
• Develop case themes from the outset and update them regularly to keep the legal team focused. In today’s economy, litigants don’t have the luxury of chasing down leads that don’t relate directly to winning their case.
• Prioritize tasks. If the judge disfavors summary judgments, a summary judgment motion isn’t likely to be worth the effort. Motions to dismiss that will require the plaintiff to re-plead don’t represent a sensible strategy, either. And rather than demanding that the opposition implement an electronic search protocol that yields a million pages of documents, shoot for a targeted search with a fraction of that yield.
• Cooperate with opposing counsel. Civility is more efficient than scorched-earth tactics, Rader says. Avoid motions to compel, which are almost never necessary and disliked by judges.
• Abide by deadlines and hold the other party’s feet to the fire. Time extensions almost always lead to greater overall cost.
• Involve a business manager and in-house counsel in supervising the case from the beginning to ensure that your litigation strategy matches your business goals and your legal fees don’t balloon out of proportion to those goals. Scheduling meetings or calls on a weekly or even daily basis ensures that outside litigators understand their marching orders.
• Although settling is the surest way to reduce legal expense, positioning the case for settlement requires clear commitment and planning for trial. An opposing party who sees clearly that your case is being prepared well for trial will be willing to pay more as a defendant in a settlement — or accept less as plaintiff — than one who only sees paper being pushed around without a clear trial strategy. “In short, whether you hope for settlement or trial, you must litigate the case to win,” Rader says. “By applying a few basic rules and a healthy dose of common sense, you can win without breaking the bank.”

Source: IP Frontline

For many tech transfer professionals in the throes of negotiating a deal, university counsel sometimes seems more like an opponent than part of the team. In-house legal reviews have often been cited as slowing down negotiations, alienating licensees, insisting on terms that set negotiations back, and representing a black hole that agreements may never emerge from. In short, TTO execs and licensees alike are often frustrated by a bureaucratic approach, when what’s called for is a fast, business-minded approach that reflects the fast-paced realities of the corporate world.

That’s why we’ve lined up two attorney experts with first-hand insights into the challenges often presented by university counsel. They’ll share a wealth of specific strategies for speeding reviews, managing the in-house counsel relationship, enhancing deal term flexibility, promoting culture change, and getting deals done faster and with less red tape. Join us on April 29 for a pull-no-punches audioseminar, Working Effectively with University Counsel to Speed the Licensing Process. In this down-to-earth 90-minute program, Sean O’Connor, director of the Entrepreneurial Law Clinic and the University of Washington, and Bryce Pilz, assistant general counsel for the University of Michigan and its TTO, will help you break down communication barriers and dramatically reduce the frustrations of in-house legal reviews. For complete information and to register, CLICK HERE.

COMING SOON: Stretch Your TTO’s Budget: Tap Into Industry Resources and Partnerships — Thursday, April 8, 2010

Not able to attend yesterday’s program on the Bilski decision’s impact on university IP? CLICK HERE to order the CD or MP3 and listen at your convenience.

To create a company around a new technology requires both business acumen and technological knowhow. Entrepreneurs must know how to talk about science to scientists while scientists must learn how to explain a highly technical product or process to business audiences. That was one of the lessons learned for Ryan Goodnight, a member of the winning team of the 2010 Mays MBA Tech Transfer Challenge (TTC) hosted by the Center for New Ventures and Entrepreneurship (CNVE) at Texas A&M University. With bachelor’s and master’s degrees in aerospace engineering, Goodnight had to learn how to explain technical details without overwhelming an audience that might have difficulty even pronouncing the name of the technology (”connection methodologies for interstitially insulated coaxial pipe”), let alone understanding its function and place in the market. Goodnight describes his team’s technology as a tube within a tube that uses wire mesh, Mylar film, and air as insulation between the two tubes.

The annual contest assigns a group of four to five first-year MBA students to a technology created at A&M and asks them to assess the product’s marketability. The process is a learning experience for the students and provides business insight to campus inventors who are working to commercialize their ideas. Past TTC technologies that are currently on the market or in final stages of testing including MacuCLEAR of Plano, TX, which is developing eye drops to combat leading causes of blindness and vision impairment such as dry age-related macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy, and CorInnova of College Station, TX, a medical device company that is developing minimally invasive technologies to enhance heart recovery.

Source: Mays Business Online

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and National Economic Council has released a Request for Information on Commercialization of University Research. The RFI comes on the heels of a previously announced innovation initiative by the Obama Administration to work with universities, companies, federal research labs, entrepreneurs, investors, and nonprofits to identify ways to increase the economic impact of federal investment in university R&D and the innovations being fostered in federal and private proof-of-concept centers (POCC).

The RFI asks specific questions in two broad categories. Part I addresses university research, promising practices, and successful models:

• What are some promising practices and successful models for fostering commercialization and diffusion of university research? What is the evidence that these approaches are successful? How could these promising practices be more widely adopted?
• Some universities participate in regional innovation “ecosystems” with dense concentrations of venture and angel investors, experienced entrepreneurs and managers, and a mix of large and small firms. These universities also have faculty who have been involved in commercialization of research and entrepreneurship and can serve as mentors and role models to faculty or students. How can universities and their external partners expand their ability to commercialize research in the absence of these favorable conditions?
• What are appropriate metrics for evaluating the success or failure of initiatives to promote commercialization of university research?
• What changes in public policy and research funding should the Obama Administration consider that would promote commercialization of university research? How could existing programs be modified or augmented to encourage commercialization of university research?

Part II addresses the experience of POCCs:

• What underlying conditions are necessary to enhance the success of a POCC? How can regions with less significant angel and VC investment cultures support POCCs and start-up business activity? Can current POCC successes transfer to other regions and universities? How important is active participation by a strong local business community in a POCC? How can federal agencies, research institutions, federal researchers, and the private sector work together to foster more successful POCCs that accelerate commercialization into the marketplace?
• What are examples of successful practices? What are the key ingredients responsible for this success? Is there any evidence that indicates POCCs are an effective mechanism to foster local or regional economic development and job creation? What lessons can be learned from other successful models such as technology-based economic development organizations that support POCCs? To what extent do interdisciplinary services (legal, accounting, business plan training) contribute to POCCs successes?
• How do you define the success of a POCC? What are the relevant inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impacts for success metrics? What is the time period needed to measure success as applied to different types of technologies? Would the appropriate success metrics for a POCC affiliated with a university be different than one affiliated with a federal research lab?
• How can R&D assets supported by the federal government — such as a multi-agency, multidisciplinary database of supported research — be leveraged to support POCCs? How could such assistance also bolster state and local government programs? What other administrative policies/practices should the Administration consider modifying, adopting or implementing to enhance the success prospects of POCCs, including streamlining reporting requirements?

Responses to the RFI are due by April 26, 2010, and must be delivered electronically as an attachment to an e-mail sent to [email protected] with the subject line “Commercialization of University Research.”

Source:  www.GPO.gov

In a move that hints at an eventual credentialing process for tech transfer professionals, a coalition of organizations jointly established the Alliance of Technology Transfer Professionals (ATTP) at the AUTM annual meeting. ATTP’s stated objective is to lead the development of the tech transfer profession by promoting recognition, progress, and the sharing of knowledge within the global tech transfer community. ATTP is a not-for-profit corporation registered in the U.K. In addition to AUTM, organizations participating in the group include the Association of European Science and Technology Transfer Professionals (ASTP), the Association of Technology Managers in Taiwan (ATMT), Knowledge Commercialization Australasia (KCA), and PraxisUnico. “The creation of ATTP represents the next major step in the development of the academic technology transfer profession,” says Ashley J. Stevens, DPhil (Oxon), CLP, AUTM’s president.

Academic TT is recognized around the world as a vital profession that transfers innovations from public sector research to the private sector for commercialization and economic development, adds Kevin Edward Cullen, PhD, director of research & enterprise at the University of Glasgow, Scotland. “ATTP is the international professional body set up to lead the development of that profession and its practitioners,” Cullen says. “We look forward to other, like-minded associations joining the Alliance to advance technology transfer globally.”

Source:  AUTM

As tech transfer managers from around the world convened at the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) annual meeting in New Orleans, a commercialization expert and an inventor came together to propose an “Academic Inventors’ Bill of Rights.” Alan Bentley, director of commercialization for Cleveland Clinic Innovations, and Renee Kaswan, DVM, MS, DACVO, founder of IPAdvocate.org and former research professor at the University of Georgia, contend that the adoption of standard IP rights for students and faculty will benefit not only inventors but also universities and society. “Most technology commercialization professionals understand the importance of building strong partnerships with our faculty innovators,” says Bentley. who pointedly did not embrace the notion of faculty “free agency” proposed recently by The Kauffman Foundation and supported by Kaswan. “The productivity of our industry has been called into question of late, partly because of isolated system failures in working with faculty,” Bentley adds. “The creation of a standardized Inventors’ Bill of Rights that all academic institutions can adopt would be a powerful message to our faculty that commercialization is indeed a partnership.”

“Faculty researchers generally understand that the university’s tech transfer office can be a valuable resource, but we’re also vulnerable because there are no official protections of our role in translating our discoveries into products that benefit society,” Kaswan says. “It’s encouraging to see both sides coming together to discuss these issues openly, and to brainstorm creative solutions.”

The Inventors’ Bill of Rights proposes, among other things:

• Students and faculty have a right to freedom of expression, and the right to teach and publish their research shall not be abridged by IP policy.
• Inventors shall be entitled to timely disposition of their inventions and to obtain access to inventions for which the university elects to halt commercialization efforts without onerous restrictions or obligations to the university that would act as disincentives to commercialize.
• Universities must establish and publish transparent practices and procedures comprising their commercialization processes.
• Inventors have the right to due process, conducted in public with public access to all records as they may request.
• All inventors, including students and other subordinate persons, shall have equal right to institutional protection of their interests in their IP regardless of academic rank or position.
• Inventors have the right to be informed about any license negotiations or renegotiations.
• An appropriate faculty-run governance body, such as a Faculty Senate, shall approve any changes to IP or commercialization policies.
• A committee that includes faculty, student, and administrative representatives shall resolve disputes.

Source: WebSphere Journal

Scientists from Texas Medical Center in Houston have unveiled a technique for growing 3-D cell cultures, a technological leap from the flat petri dish that could save millions of dollars in drug-testing costs. The research is reported in Nature Nanotechnology. The 3-D technique, which is easy for most labs to set up immediately, uses magnetic forces to levitate cells while they divide and grow. Compared with cell cultures grown on flat surfaces, the 3-D cell cultures tend to form tissues that more closely resemble those inside the body. “The body is 3-D, and cultures that more closely resemble native tissue are expected to provide better results for preclinical drug tests,” says study co-author Tom Killian, PhD, associate professor of physics at Rice University. “If you could improve the accuracy of early drug screenings by just 10%, it’s estimated you could save as much as $100 million per drug.”

For cancer research, the invisible scaffold created by the magnetic field goes beyond its potential for producing cell cultures that better resemble actual tumors, says co-author Wadih Arap, PhD, professor in the David H. Koch Center at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. To make cells levitate, the research team modified a combination of gold nanoparticles and engineered viral particles called phages that was developed in Arap’s lab. The targeted “nanoshuttle” can deliver payloads to specific organs or tissues.

“A logical next step for us will be to use this additional magnetic property in targeted ways to explore possible applications in the imaging and treatment of tumors,” Arap says. The 3-D modeling raises another interesting long-term possibility. Researchers also note the technology may be useful in building better models of human organs. The start-up Nano3D Biosciences, which licensed the technology from Rice and M.D. Anderson, is conducting additional tests to compare how the new method stacks up against existing methods of growing 3-D cell cultures.

Source:  Science Daily

2Market Information Inc., publisher of Tech Transfer E-News, has just published a new title as part of an all-new volume of its popular Tech Transfer Library. “Start-up Strategies” is one of eight topic-specific reports in the just-released Volume 2 of the library. It features case studies, best practices, and expert guidance on launching successful university spinouts. Additional topics in the library include legal issues, marketing strategies, portfolio management, early-stage funding, faculty outreach, performance improvement and staffing, and contracting and negotiation. To order or for more information, including tables of contents for each report, CLICK HERE.

Northeastern University, Boston Medical Center, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have entered into a licensing agreement with Engineered Care, a San Francisco-area health care software company, to commercialize virtual nursing software developed by Timothy Bickmore, PhD, assistant professor in Northeastern’s College of Computer and Information Science. The software features a computer-animated nurse, “Louise,” who talks patients though the hospital discharge process and assesses their understanding of medical instructions. “Post-discharge self-care regimens are typically complex, with the average patient going away with 10 medications and multiple follow-up appointments,” Bickmore explains. “The discharge is even more hazardous for patients who have difficulty reading and following basic written medical instructions.” Nevertheless, the average pre-discharge conversation outlining care instructions lasts fewer than eight minutes.

Nearly 20% of discharged patients are readmitted within a month due to low health literacy and insufficient knowledge of self-care medical instructions, according to Brian Jack, MD, a physician at Boston Medical Center. Nearly 30% of these readmissions are preventable with a more complete reinforcement of discharge directions, Jack says. Reducing these preventable readmissions not only means healthier patients but also lower health care costs. “Louise” is Bickmore’s solution to these discharge issues. Using a touch screen, patients interact with Louise through an 11-step discharge process that takes an average of 52 minutes, at a pace that can be controlled by the patient. Louise asks about medication regimens and follow-up visits. She also tailors her facial expressions and responses to the patient based on input that patients provide to the discharge material. Louise also quizzes patients to assess their understanding of medical instructions.

In a pilot program at Boston Medical Center, nearly 450 patients used Louise, and the results were encouraging. “Patients in the trial group weren’t afraid to repeatedly ask Louise for instructions and didn’t feel rushed to move though the discharge process,” Bickmore says. Engineered Care has been granted exclusive rights to implement the patient discharge technology. The firm plans to market the product domestically and globally within the next three years.

Source:  Northeastern University News

Columbia University and R&D firm Global Research Technologies (GRT) have inked a worldwide research collaboration and cross-licensing agreement for technology that extracts and captures carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. Today, only living plants, atmospheric chemical cycles, and other natural systems can pull large volumes of CO2 out of the air. Efforts to snare manmade CO2 — released primarily from the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal and gasoline — from the air are not yet viable at scale but hold great promise. Columbia’s air capture technology, called a “synthetic tree,” uses proprietary resins and processes to absorb CO2 from the air, potentially at a rate 1,000 times faster than natural trees. The synthetic trees, which have a predicted lifespan of 15 years, consume minimal energy during the carbon capture process and share similar energy requirements for sorbent regeneration with other carbon capture technologies.

Klaus Lackner, PhD, professor of geophysics and director of the Lenfest Center for Sustainable Energy at Columbia’s Earth Institute, and Allen Wright, senior staff associate at the Earth Institute, cofounded GRT, which has offices in Waukesha, WI, and New York City, to advance basic research and accelerate development of air capture technologies. Initial units, due within two years, will be able to capture up one ton of CO2 per day at a cost of less than $100 per ton of air-captured CO2, according to GRT CEO William Gridley. GRT plans to sell the diluted captured gas as a nutrient for greenhouses and algae farms and eventually to sell compressed gas for drink carbonation, dry ice formulation, and other niche markets that today total $1 billion to $2 billion per year. “One of the unique advantages of this technology is that it makes possible the capture of CO2 from the air anywhere in the world,” explains James Aloise, who manages IP related to green technology for Columbia Technology Ventures, Columbia’s TTO. “Unlike the few existing carbon capture approaches, it’s not necessary to co-locate these units with sources of CO2 emissions. This inherent flexibility and mobility improves access to the technology, which has true potential to make a global impact.”

Source: News Blaze

Seattle-based AttoDx, Inc., has signed an exclusive license agreement for molecular viabilitiy testing technology developed at the University of Washington and the Seattle Biomedical Research Institute. The technology was developed by Gerard Cangelosi, PhD, affiliate member of Seattle BioMed and affiliate associate professor in U-Washington’s departments of global health & epidemiology. Cangelosi’s research seeks to reduce exposure to infectious diseases by using biomarker discovery and point-of-care diagnostics to improve case finding, improving detection of pathogens in water, and improving the understanding of infectious disease epidemiology.

Although polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a fast, sensitive, and specific method to detect microorganisms in samples, widespread use is limited by its inability to distinguish viable pathogen cells from dead cells and free nucleic acid fragments, Cangelosi points out. “We have shown that PCR tests for ribosomal RNA precursors (pre-rRNA) can overcome this problem,” he explains. “We are developing pre-rRNA tests for pathogen detection in environmental as well as clinical samples.” The lab also is using environmental pathogens as models to understand the emergence of new infectious diseases in humans.

AttoDx, which is developing and commercializing pathogen detection and lab-on-a-chip products, expects this technology to be a key element in the development of rapid pathogen detection products in medicine, food and water safety, and the environment.

Source: Seattle BioMed

Denver-based dental company Snoasis Medical, Inc., has introduced BioXclude, a processed, dehydrated, and terminally sterilized graft composed of human amnion and chorion tissue that was developed at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center (UCHSC). BioXclude — the second product developed by Snoasis Medical using technology licensed from UCHSC — is the first allograft sourced from donated placental tissue for use as a wound covering in guided bone regeneration procedures. The technology exploits a low-cost product that uses a natural source of growth factors, rather than recombinant technology, to lower manufacturing costs.

The dental regenerative market is continually evolving from scientific innovations that are aimed at improving outcomes and predictability while reducing complications. “Using both parts of the amniotic sac has allowed Snoasis to introduce a product that possesses the necessary thickness to be suitable for use as a wound covering in guided bone regeneration procedures,” says Robert Tofe, Snoasis president and founder. BioXclude is placed dry and conforms to the surgical site, eliminating the need for sutures to keep it in place, explains Mark Lucas, DDS, MS, of Denver, one of a handful of clinicians who participated in the product’s clinical evaluation. “Precise trimming is not required as the material adapts easily to the graft site, and all cases demonstrated a high quality of new bone upon reentry, with minimal swelling and inflammation soon after the graft surgery,” he adds.

Source: Snoasis Medical Products

As part of a busy week for UC system, the University of Colorado has inked additional licenses for technologies developed at its Boulder (CU-Boulder) campus and Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora. CU-Boulder completed a license agreement with Reverse Osmosis Technologies (ROTEC) for technology that enables more efficient treatment of groundwater to make it suitable for drinking. ROTEC, an Israel-based water treatment technology company, will use the licensed technology to improve the performance of its water desalination process. ROTEC is developing a technology to increase the amount of brackish (partially saline) groundwater that can be reclaimed by reverse osmosis using a reverse flow methodology developed by Jack Gilron, DSc, senior scientist, and Eli Korin, PhD, professor of chemical engineering, at Ben-Gurion University (BGU) of the Negev.

In reverse osmosis systems, precipitation of salts found in saline and hard water causes scaling — one of the main factors limiting the recovery of potable water. Technology developed by Alan Greenberg, PhD, professor and associate chair of CU-Boulder’s department of mechanical engineering and executive director of the Membrane Applied Science & Technology Center, uses a patented ultrasonic sensor to detect when scaling begins. The sensor triggers a change in the system flow patterns to prevent scaling. BGU and ROTEC have begun operations at a pilot facility and plan to operate the pilot at a desalination plant and an additional test site.

In addition, CU inked a licensing agreement with HepQuant, LLC, that allows the Colorado-based development-stage company to continue commercialization of its diagnostic technology to assess chronic liver disease. All major manifestations of chronic liver disease, including cirrhosis, ascites, fibrosis, varices, and encephalopathy, are linked to an impairment of the liver’s portal circulation. Fifteen million to 30 million people in the U.S., and at least 500 million worldwide, suffer from these diseases. The first product to be developed based on the licensed technology, HepQuant-Dual, is a noninvasive, cost-effective test that measures the liver’s portal circulation using natural compounds labeled with stable isotopes. The test enables physicians to detect liver disease, measure the severity of the disease, and predict risk for future complications.

Gregory T. Everson, MD, professor and director of hepatology at the UC Denver School of Medicine, invented the test. HepQuant originally optioned the technology from CU in 2008, when it received a $100,000 seed investment from CU’s TTO to support further commercial development. The company expects clinical trials to begin in late 2010, with commercial availability by 2013, subject to FDA approval.

Sources: Knowledge | Innovation | Technology and Knowledge | Innovation | Technology

If the rumor mill in Washington is correct, the Supreme Court decision in the precedent-setting Bilski case may be handed down as early as this week. One week from today, a team of three university IP experts will gather for a 90-minute audioconference that will focus on the practical steps and strategies you can take to prepare for the fall-out — and minimize any negative impact on IP in development, already-patented innovations, pending applications, and existing license agreements. The Court’s ruling in the Bilski case has the potential to alter the landscape for business method patents, but its reach extends further than you might think. That’s why it’s critical for you to prepare now and determine your patent portfolio’s exposure to Bilski-related turmoil, decide how vigorously you want to defend affected patents, if at all, and explore alternatives for protecting relevant IP. Join us next Tuesday for The Bilski Decision: Expert Strategies to Manage Its Impact on University IP. CLICK HERE for details and to register.

Also coming soon:

• Stretch Your TTO’s Budget: Tap Into Industry Resources and Partnerships — Thursday, April 8, 2010
• Working Effectively with University Counsel to Speed the Licensing Process — Thursday, April 29, 2010

The University of Michigan (U-M) has signed an exclusive patent license and sponsored research agreement with GMP Companies, Inc., through its subsidiary GMP Immunotherapeutics, Inc., for a class of molecules designed to treat systemic lupus erythematosus (lupus), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis, and some forms of cancer. GMP Immunotherapeutics will collaborate with Gary Glick, PhD, U-M’s Werner E. Bachmann professor of chemistry and professor of biological chemistry, and Anthony Opipari, Jr., MD, PhD, assistant professor in the department of obstetrics & gynecology at U-M’s Medical School, to conduct additional studies.

The U-M technology involves the application of benzodiazepine derivatives against a new molecular target. This approach forms the basis of a therapeutic platform to treat autoimmune diseases where the balance of cell proliferation and programmed cell death (apoptosis) has been disrupted. In tests in animal models of human lupus and RA, U-M researchers found that the class of cytotoxic benzodiazepine compounds altered the progression of the diseases by selectively inducing apoptosis of the immune cells that mediate the disease process. “The hope is that, with a new therapeutic approach and improved selectivity, these benzodiazepine derivatives will significantly improve upon existing therapies for these diseases,” Glick says. According to the Lupus Foundation of America, more than 16,000 Americans develop lupus each year and an estimated 1.4 million Americans have a form of the disease.

Under terms of the agreement, GMP Immunotherapeutics has licensed the exclusive rights to the U-M technology for commercial applications worldwide. Over the next several years, GMP Immunotherapeutics will provide U-M with research funding, license fees, research milestone payments, and royalties based on the success of the drug candidates. The agreement represents the second license and collaboration between U-M and GMP Companies, according to Robin Rasor, director of licensing at U-M.

Source:  Mombu

Researchers at Brigham Young University (BYU) in Provo, UT, have shown that a molecule made when soy is digested stimulates production of collagen and elastin — two key components of healthy skin. Now, the university has licensed the technology to Nu Skin Enterprises to use in a serum that’s part of its anti-aging product line. A research team led by Edwin Lephart, PhD, professor of physiology and developmental biology at BYU, discovered that the molecule made by metabolizing soy isoflavons, called equol, has potential impact on not only skin but also on baldness, prostate health, weight gain, and brain health. Lephart called the journey from lab bench to retail product “very exciting.”

To study the potential skin benefits, the researchers cultured human skin cells in the lab. Next, they tested the equol to see how it interacted with collagen, which gives skin structure, and elastin, which provides the elasticity for skin to regain normal shape after stretching or contracting. They found that equol stimulates both collagen and elastin while also inhibiting enzymes that would break down the two. Under the licensing agreement with Provo-based Nu Skin, equol will be one of the active ingredients in the ageLOC Future Serum. That product, along with a cleanser and two moisturizers — one for day and one for night — make up the ageLOC Transformation daily skin-care line, which generated more than $28 million in revenues during the fourth quarter of 2009.

Equol also may have implications for promoting wound healing, based on the molecule’s characteristics, according to Lephart. BYU is negotiating with other companies to license the rights to use equol to treat conditions besides skin health, according to BYU spokesman Michael Smart. Patents are pending for the equol-related technology, which was developed in collaboration with researchers at Colorado State University and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. Both institutions will receive a share of the royalties generated by the BYU license.

Source:  Deseret News

University of Porto Innovation (UPIN), the knowledge transfer office of the University of Porto, Portugal, has produced a manual entitled “Best practices in the transfer of sustainable technologies to industry.” The manual focuses on best-in-class practices underlying tech transfer from universities to industry, featuring explanations from top innovation experts on how their initiatives contribute to effective knowledge transfer. This manual includes contributions from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Texas at Austin through UTEN Portugal, and the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft institutes, as well as independent experts, companies, and institutions involved in tech transfer. The publication aims to raise awareness among a broad set of stakeholders — private companies, science and technology organizations, and public bodies — about knowledge transfer activities and to encourage them to take up some of the best practices with a view to supporting more sustainable development. The bilingual manual is only available in electronic format on UPIN’s website.

Source:  The University Technology Enterprise Network