Patent protection and licensing in microfluidics.

Microfluidic devices offer control over low-volume samples in order to achieve high-throughput analysis, and reduce turnaround time and costs. Their efficient commercialisation has implications for biomedical sciences, veterinary medicine, environmental monitoring and industrial applications. In particular, market diffusion of microfluidic laboratory and point-of-care diagnostic devices can contribute to the improvement of global health. In their commercialisation, consultancy and patent protection are essential elements that complement academic publishing. The awareness of knowledge transfer strategies can help academics to create value for their research. The aim of this article is to provide a guidance to (1) overview the terminology in patent law, (2) elucidate the process of filing a patent in the US, EU, Japan and internationally, (3) discuss strategies to licence a patent, and (4) explain tactics to defend a patent in a potential infringement. Awareness of the patent law and rights allows obtaining optimised, valid and valuable patents, while accelerating implementation to market route. Striking a balance between academic publishing, consultancy to industry and patent protection can increase commercial potential, enhance economic growth and create social impact.

[1]  Mark F. Peterson,et al.  Developing High-Tech Ventures: Entrepreneurs, Advisors, and the Use of Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) , 2012 .

[2]  A. Kamholz.  Proliferation of microfluidics in literature and intellectual property. , 2004, Lab on a chip.

[3]  K. Idris.  WIPO intellectual property handbook: policy, law and use , 2001 .

[4]  John E. Tilton,et al.  Using exploration expenditures to assess the climate for mineral investment , 2008 .

[5]  Brad D. Pedersen,et al.  The Rush to a First-to-File Patent System in the United States: Is a Globally Standardized Patent Reward System Really Beneficial to Patent Quality and Administrative Efficiency? , 2006 .

[6]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition , 2001 .

[7]  Philip M. Webber.  A guide to drug discovery: Protecting your inventions: the patent system , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[8]  J. Lerner.  The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis , 1994 .

[9]  Barry J Marenberg.  Driving innovation – Intellectual property strategies for a dynamic world , 2010 .

[10]  Alan C. Marco.  The Option Value of Patent Litigation: Theory and Evidence , 2005 .

[11]  Samuel K Sia,et al.  Commercialization of microfluidic point-of-care diagnostic devices. , 2012, Lab on a chip.

[12]  Alfons Palangkaraya,et al.  Application Pendency Times and Outcomes across Four Patent Offices , 2008 .

[13]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Optimal Patent Length and Breadth , 1990 .

[14]  Holger Becker,et al.  Hype, hope and hubris: the quest for the killer application in microfluidics. , 2009, Lab on a chip.

[15]  Christopher B. Seaman,et al.  Best Mode Trade Secrets , 2012 .

[16]  R. Zengerle,et al.  Microfluidic lab-on-a-chip platforms: requirements, characteristics and applications. , 2010, Chemical Society reviews.

[17]  David J. Teece,et al.  Royalties, evolving patent rights, and the value of innovation , 2004 .

[18]  Richard A. Deitrich.  Bulletin of SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY , 1998 .

[19]  John L. Turner,et al.  The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s Impact on Patent Litigation , 2005, The Journal of Legal Studies.

[20]  D. Beebe,et al.  The present and future role of microfluidics in biomedical research , 2014, Nature.

[21]  Dietmar Harhoff,et al.  Modelling the Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[22]  L. Yueh,et al.  Patent laws and innovation in China , 2009 .

[23]  Roland Zengerle,et al.  Microfluidic platforms for lab-on-a-chip applications. , 2007, Lab on a chip.

[24]  Wesley M. Cohen,et al.  R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States , 2002 .

[25]  George M Whitesides,et al.  Cool, or simple and cheap? Why not both? , 2013, Lab on a chip.

[26]  Suzanne L. Holcombe.  United States Patent and Trademark Office , 2008 .

[27]  F. Montobbio,et al.  Knowledge diffusion from university and public research. A comparison between US, Japan and Europe using patent citations , 2009 .

[28]  Stuart J. H. Graham,et al.  Comparing Patent Litigation Across Europe: A First Look , 2014 .

[29]  Ashish Arora,et al.  Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[30]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980 , 2001 .

[31]  Holger Becker,et al.  IP or no IP: that is the question. , 2009, Lab on a chip.

[32]  Michael White,et al.  World Intellectual Property Organization , 2000, Permanent Missions to the United Nations, No. 309.

[33]  R. Nelson,et al.  On the Complex Economics of Patent Scope , 1990 .

[34]  Ali K Yetisen,et al.  Commercialization of microfluidic devices. , 2014, Trends in biotechnology.

[35]  K. Blind,et al.  Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany , 2006 .

[36]  R. Rosenfeld.  Nature , 2009, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[37]  Shyamkrishna Balganesh.  Causing Copyright , 2017 .

[38]  A. Woolley,et al.  Advances in microfluidic materials, functions, integration, and applications. , 2013, Chemical reviews.

[39]  Robert Langer,et al.  First-in-Human Testing of a Wirelessly Controlled Drug Delivery Microchip , 2012, Science Translational Medicine.

[40]  George M Whitesides,et al.  A glimpse into the future of diagnostics. , 2013, Clinical chemistry.

[41]  Josh Lerner,et al.  The Empirical Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Innovation: Puzzles and Clues , 2008 .

[42]  Ali K. Yetisen,et al.  A smartphone algorithm with inter-phone repeatability for the analysis of colorimetric tests , 2014 .

[43]  Alexander Kurov,et al.  Review of Financial Economics , 2012 .

[44]  Nina L White,et al.  Time waits for no man: deciding when to file a patent application in Europe , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[45]  E. Kaufer,et al.  The Economics of the Patent System , 2002 .

[46]  Marc Herrmann,et al.  Current State of Intellectual Property in Microfluidic Nucleic Acid Analysis , 2007 .

[47]  F. A. Hayek.  The American Economic Review , 2007 .

[48]  Richard Johnson.  Journal Economics , 1999, Science.

[49]  Ali Kemal Yetisen,et al.  Paper-based microfluidic point-of-care diagnostic devices. , 2013, Lab on a chip.

[50]  Ali Khademhosseini,et al.  Microfluidics for drug discovery and development: from target selection to product lifecycle management. , 2008, Drug discovery today.

[51]  Nathan Blow,et al.  Microfluidics: the great divide , 2009, Nature Methods.

[52]  M C Emre Simsekler,et al.  The regulation of mobile medical applications. , 2014, Lab on a chip.

[53]  Carsten Haber,et al.  Microfluidics in commercial applications; an industry perspective. , 2006, Lab on a chip.