CambridgeIP Nanomaterials Trends

CambridgeIPNanomaterials trends:Evidence from scientific literatureNanoMaterials 2011June 2011Quentin Tannock, Chairman and Co-founderIlian Iliev, CEO and Co-founder © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Outline• Executive Summary: Overview of findings• Survey: Your feedback on IP strategies, activities, budgets & issues• Study Methodology: Evidence-based understandings of trends• Study Context: Patenting in nanotech broadly• Study Findings: • NanoMaterials: Patent trends & examples • NanoManufacturing: Methods & application fields• Patent strategy conclusions• Appendix: CambridgeIP background & contacts 2 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Overview of nanomaterials patent study findings• A general rise in nanotechnology patent activity masks a slow- down in patenting rates in some nanotech sub-spaces• Growth in ‘Nanomaterials’ has consistently outstripped growth in other sub-spaces  Nanomaterials patent filings now account for around 40% of nanotechnology patents  Within „nanomaterials‟: Overall, „traditional‟ nano-materials remain important, Patent trends over time however we observe increased activity in some „emerging‟ materials like graphene  Its all about the money… Emerging application areas include Energy & Environment• Our nanomaterials patent activity research also reveals  High inter-relation between patents possibly indicating the presence of blocking patents and patent thickets, also indicating complexity of nanomaterials deployments and multiple markets/application spaces  High patent forward citation rates indicating breadth and quality  Rising strength of Asian countries and China in particular accompanied by Patents are inter-related acquisitions of companies and technologies by Chinese companies.  Good mix of leading Universities & major corporations, indications that the space overall is research intensive, yet maturing commercially.  Many joint patent filings indicating collaborative R&D• You expressed concerns over blocking patents, patent thickets and patent costs Corporate/University R&D netw orks

Survey: About your developmentsOnly around 16% of respondents are developing a nano-material.25% are developing a nano-material manufacturing method.Surprisingly a further 25% are developing a „device‟... Indicating thatthe space is maturing commercially? Or of the diversity of the „nano-materials space‟. Or of complexity in deploying nanomaterials? CambridgeIP survey on patent strategies in nanotechnology • Manufacturing method Most respondents • Material were either in the 25- • Device Other (please specify) 50 people (42%) or 50+ people (25%) size range.30% of respondents focus their developments on Industrialapplications (like Automotive, Aerospace and Electronics). There wasa roughly even split of application focus on Health, Environment and 5Chemicals sectors. © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Survey: About your patent strategiesThese are the objectives of your patent strategies: CambridgeIP survey on patent strategies in nanotechnology 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Protect your Manage Showcase Not relevant Use in Generate market litigation risk technology to us as we fundraising licensing will never efforts revenue file a patentThis is what your patents seek to protect: Most respondents CambridgeIP survey on patent strategies in nanotechnology were either in the 25- 40.0% 50 people (42%) or 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 50+ people (25%) 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% size range. 5.0% 0.0% 6 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Survey: About Your IP activities and budgets • Even if you decide to undertake IP research in- house (e.g. using a system like Boliven.com) plan & budget for your IP research time and costs – IP Research: 90% of survey respondents see value in IP Landscaping and use IP data to glean technology ideas, yet 60% of you do not have a budget for IP research activities • Best practice is to budget for your planned activities – Patent filing and maintenance: For those of you with patents or planning to file patents, your filing and maintenance budget estimates per patent ranged from GBP 0.00 to GBP 10k per year 7 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Survey: Key IP-related barriers and IP-related difficultiesyou face • Blocking Patents: Half of respondents indicated that blocking patents exist in their area of focus, a further third „have never checked‟ for blocking patents • Patent Thickets: One third of respondents indicated that a „patent thicket‟ exists in their area of focus, a further third „have no idea‟ if a patent thicket exists or not 8 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Take the survey: IP issues facing the nanotechcommunity • Our survey is ongoing and aims to identify the key Intellectual Property issues facing the nanotechnology community today. • There is an option at the end of the survey to receive a summary of the survey results. Take the survey: www.cambridgeip.com/index.php/knowled ge-centre/nanotech-survey

A wealth of technical knowledge in science literature e.g. The patent system represents a significant global technological library• Patents as data are: 90% of survey respondents said they – Structured use patent data regularly for IP – Comparable Landscaping & for identifying – Objective technology ideas. – Information rich• Multiple patent data sources are available (an opportunity and a challenge!), e.g: – USPTO – Espace.net – Google Patents – Boliven.com – Specialists like CambridgeIP• Other useful data sources include: Journal articles, conference proceedings, clinical trials data, litigation data and more 11 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Advanced IP Landscape ® analysis examplesSector composition analysis Technology evolution mapsIdentifying hot-spots and new Identifying technology migration andareas of R&D activity across broad diffusion patterns over time, togethertechnology spaces (this example: with interdependenciesBiosensors) IPC Relationship Map: 2000 The applications and location of client‟s technology are dispersed IPC Relationship Map: 2007 Over time, 2 key clusters of application have developed 12 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Discovery of networks and knowledge flowsCase study: TshinguaUniversityNanotechnology R&Dnetworks Number of Patents: Annual and Cumulative Number of New Applications Cumulative 60 400 350 50 300 Patents - Cumulative 40 Patents - Yearly 250 30 200 150 20 100 10 50 0 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 © 2010 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

The role of knowledge management platformse.g., Boliven.com :• Comprehensive: 100 million+ document database of patent and non-patent literature• Popular & accessible: Rapidly growing - 30,000+ unique visitors per month• Unparalleled ease of use: Real-time results, integrated analytics• Built-in expert and expert network identification: People need to understand & implement technologiesSearch literature & access full results Undertake your own analysis: e.g., trends over time, top corporations 14 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nanotechnology patent study methodology (1) We undertook patent research into nanotechnology patents and identified trends & patents of interest emerging over the last 5 years• We undertook a literature review focused on past patent studies• We interviewed nanotechnology and industry experts• We conducted a semi-automated and expert-validated analysis of the patent space on our systems, generated trend information and identified example patents Samples are available on Boliven.com (free registration for access)  www.boliven.com/landscapes  http://www.boliven.com/boliven_landscapes/ip_report/nanotechnology_patent_review Further research is available on request 15 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Methodology (2): From technology taxonomy to patent andpartner discoverydiscovery Manufacturing NanoParticles fuel cells Photovoltaics construction and concrete air purification water purification Techniques Deposition techniques lithography x x x x Top Down vacuum coating x x x x spray coating x x x x Mechanical ball milling x x planetary grinding x x Wet chemistry Sol-Gel Processing x x x x Filtering Hydrothermal synthesis x x x enables rapid microemulsion processing x x x identification of Bottom Up nanoemulsion processing x x x technology Sonochemical processing x x x solutions and Gas phase synthesis plasma vaporization x prospects chemical vapour synthesis x laser ablation x Production in liquid CO2 x x x x Use of scaffolds (polymer) x x 45 41 Top 10 Assignees and Number of Patents 40 35 30 27 25 21 20 18 15 13 11 11 10 10 10 10 5 ` 0 R J REYNOLDS PHARMACIA & PHILIP MORRIS THINK GLOBAL KABI ESSER RALF HF & PHF ADVANCED ARADIGM CORP LTS LOHMANN TOBACCO CO UPJOHN INC BV PHARMACIA AB REEMTSMA TOBACCO THERAPIE- COMPANY GMBH PRODUCTS INC SYSTEME AG © 2009 R&D relationships Key players Relevant solutions 16 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nano-context: Key conclusions from previousresearch (1) Patent trend research indicates that nanotechnology: • Is a cross-cutting technology applicable to multiple market sectors • Has high levels of public development and support , compared to the average in other fields • Global development and application – US is a leader in terms of volume of patent filings , and is highly diversified – Nanobiotechnology dominates European patent filings – Nanoelectronics dominates Japan activity 18 Source: Dang (2009) © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nano-context: Key conclusions from previousresearch (2) CambridgeIP research reveals: • Higher inter-relation between patents in nano-field – Relatively high patent forward citation rates for patents relative to forward citation rates observed elsewhere – Rising strength of China: Rise in China patenting rates (accompanied by acquisitions of companies and technologies by Chinese companies) – Russia: Russian nanotechnology developments are often overlooked in the English speaking world. Many clients have little or no exposure to patent and non-patent literature in Cyrillic. The role of RusNano? • Patenting rates slow down in the period 2002 - 2004 in some nanotechnology sub- spaces, in part driven by: – Delays in patent filings (perhaps due to „time to market‟ and other considerations) – Fewer nano patents granted - increased sophistication and rigor of the nano-patent examination process – Lower levels of VC investment - end of the honeymoon? • Multiple & varied technology areas with inter-dependencies and growing number of applications 1996: A relatively 2006: An ‘explosion’ of activity across ansmall number of IPCs ever-increasing array of industrial is association with applications. No single ‘core area can be the nanotechnology discerned, which is indicative of a ‘raft’ or a field ‘platform’ technology entering maturity 19 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP research: Nanotech patent trends• Broadly rising over time, masking a drop-off in some sub-sectors• Very strong showing in the past 5 years from Asia• There are indications that the space overall is research intensive, yet maturing commercially – Top players in the past 5 years include corporations and Universities, e.g. Canon, Rice University, Samsung, Tsinghua University and 3M – Top inventors tend to be from Universities and have an industrial affiliation• Its all about the money… Example applications we observe in the patent literature include  Electronics Patent  Materials applications may be  Health & Lifestyle unpublished for 18+ months. Therefore the number of reported patents for the last 2 years may be under- represented

CambridgeIP research: Tshinguha University‟s nano R&D network –Inventors with 6 or more patents

CambridgeIP research: Trends in UK nanotechnologyR&D • UK nano strengths lie mainly in bionanotechnology, medical and cosmetic applications. • The UK‟s relatively strong R&D base in physics, materials, instrumentation and aspects of electronics (e.g. lasers, optics) also reflects in the nano related patent data 2006: An ‘explosion’ of activity 1996: A relatively across an ever-increasing arraysmall number of IPCs of industrial applications. No is association with single ‘core area can be the nanotechnology discerned, which is indicative of field a ‘raft’ or a ‘platform’ technology entering maturity 23 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP research: Nanomaterials patent trends (1)• Overall, ‘traditional’ nano-materials remain important  E.g. CNT• However we observe increased activity in some ‘emerging’ materials  E.g. Graphene• Its all about the money… Example applications we observe in the nanomaterials patent literature include  Coatings and lubricants  Reinforced materials, e.g. Hardened cutting tools including drill bits  Self-cleaning & anti-bacterial surfaces Emerging applications for nanomaterials include Energy (e.g. Conversion & storage); Environment (e.g. Water treatment) Nano Toxicity remains a concern for some application areas © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP research: Highly cited nano patent example(1)US 2003012723SPATIAL LOCALIZATION OF DISPERSED SINGLE WALLED CARBON NANOTUBESINTO USEFUL STRUCTURESAssignee: CLARKE MARK S.F, ; BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTEInventor: CLARKE MARK S F [US]Publication Date: 2003-01-16Abstract: Methods of aligning single walled carbon nanotube structures intoselected orientations for a variety of different applications are achieved by initiallydispersing the nanotube structures in aqueous solutions utilizing a suitabledispersal agent. The dispersal agent coats each individual nanotube structure insolution. The dispersal agent may be substituted with a suitable functional groupthat reacts with a corresponding binding site. Dispersed nanotube structurescoated with substituted dispersal agents are exposed to a selected array ofbinding sites such that the nanotubes align with the binding sites due to thebinding of the substituted functional groups with such binding sites. Alternatively,crystalline nanotube material is formed upon deposition of dispersed nanotubestructures within solution into channels disposed on the surface of the substrate.;Combining dispersal agent chemical modification techniques with deposition ofthe nanotubes into substrate channels is also utilized to produce usefulstructures. Number of forward references: 33 26 © 2011 CambridgeIP Ltd. All rights reserved.

CambridgeIP research: Highly cited nano patent example(2)US 2005258571METHOD OF IMPRINTING SHADOW MASK NANOSTRUCTURES FOR DISPLAY PIXELSEGREGATIONAssignee: AGENCY SCIENCE TECH & RES [SG]Inventor: DUMOND JARRETT [SG]; LOW HONG Y [SG]Publication Date: 2005-11-24Abstract: The present invention is directed to micro- and nano-scaleimprinting methods and the use of such methods to fabricate supported and/orfree-standing 3-D micro- and/or nano-structures of polymeric, ceramic, and/ormetallic materials, particularly for pixel segregation in OLED-based displays. Insome embodiments, a duo-mold approach is employed in the fabrication ofthese structures. In such methods, surface treatments are employed to impartdifferential surface energies to different molds and/or different parts of themold(s). Such surface treatments permit the formation of three-dimensional (3-D) structures through imprinting and the transfer of such structures to asubstrate.; In some or other embodiments, such surface treatments andvariation in glass transition temperature of the polymers used can facilitateseparation of the 3-D structures from the molds to form free-standing micro-and/or nano-structures individually and/or in a film. In some or otherembodiments, a "latch-on" assembly technique is utilized to form supportedand/or free-standing stacked micro- and/or nano-structures that enable theassembly of polymers without a glass transition temperature and eliminate theheating required to assemble thermoplastic polymers. Number of forward references: 20 27 © 2011 CambridgeIP Ltd. All rights reserved.

CambridgeIP research: Graphene nanomaterials• High profile material, especially since the award of the 2010 Nobel Prize for Physics to Andre Geim and Kostya Novoselov• We have identified over 1,800 „graphene‟ patents and patent applications – Essentially, graphene is a 2D form of chystalline carbon. This might give rise to challenges in distinguishing graphene from other forms of nano-carbon (including CNT, buckyballs and graphite). – Early signs are promising for patent applicants, with patent applications being granted, however there have been rejections (e.g. Lucent Technologies Inc has had a patent rejected by the US patent office on the basis of CNT prior art).• Interestingly, neither the University of Manchester nor its Nobel Prize winning inventors filed for patent applications covering their discoveries• Manufacturing graphene in large scale remains challenging. Key methods include: – Exfoliation – Epitaxy (e.g. CVD) – Cleavage• Wide range of potential applications include – Electronic devices – Sensors – Memory devices © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nanotoxicology: A Large Network Pioneers in the prevention Own 3 patents on Now working with the EC Cell Nanotoxicology (See next Slide) Specialized Magazine A Network of Universities and Institutes Database 29 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP Research - Example Patent: ToxicologyNanotoxicity WO2007094870 TOXICOLOGY AND CELLULAR EFFECT OF MANUFACTURED NANOMATERIALS Assignee: UNIV CALIFORNIA Inventor: CHEN FANQING [US] Publication Date: 2007-08-23 Abstract: The increasing use of nanotechnology in consumer products and medical applications underlies the importance of understanding its potential toxic effects to people and the environment. Herein are described methods and assays to predict and evaluate the cellular effects of nanomaterial exposure. We have performed whole genome expression array analysis and high content image analysis-based phenotypic measurements on human skin fibroblast cell populations exposed to multiwall carbon nano-onions (MWCNOs), multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), and semiconductor nanocrystals. Here we demonstrate that exposing cells to nanomaterials at cytotoxic doses induces cell cycle arrest and increases apoptosis/necrosis, activates genes involved in cellular transport, metabolism, cell cycle regulation, and stress response.; Certain nanomaterials induce genes indicative of a strong immune and inflammatory response within skin fibroblasts. Furthermore, the described MWCNOs can be used as a therapeutic in the treatment of cancer due to its cytotoxicity. 30 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nanomaterials manufacturing methods Creating nanoscale devices by using larger, externally- controlled materials, directing their formation Method Detail TypeDeposition To settle nanoparticles from a bulk Top Downtechniques material onto a pre-existing surfaceMechanical Production of nanoparticles using Top Down physical mechanismWet chemistry Nanoparticles used in chemical organic Bottom Up solutionGas phase Nanoparticles being produced in gas Bottom Upsynthesis phase using various technologiesProduction in Liquid CO2 infused with nanoparticles for Bottom Upliquid carbon coating/cleaning purposesdioxideUse of Use of a mould to build nanoparticles Bottom Upscaffolds(polymer) Using small molecular components, building them up into more complex assemblies © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Technology matrix: Bio-related fields NanoParticles Manufacturing drug delivery/ Medicine – scaffolds for Cosmetics Techniques (re) diagnostics tissue Formulation engineering Deposition techniques lithography x Top Down vacuum coating spray coating Mechanical ball milling x planetary grinding x Wet chemistry Sol-Gel Processing x x x x Hydrothermal synthesis x x x microemulsion processing x x x x Bottom Up nanoemulsion processing x x x x Sonochemical processing x x x x Gas phase synthesis plasma vaporization chemical vapour synthesis laser ablation Production in liquid CO2 x x x x Use of scaffolds (polymer) x x x x 33 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Technology matrix: Environment-related fields Key area of concern for climate change policy NanoParticles Manufacturing fuel cells Photovoltaics construction air purification water Techniques and concrete purification Deposition techniques lithography x x x x Top Down vacuum coating x x x x spray coating x x x x Mechanical ball milling x x planetary grinding x x Wet chemistry Sol-Gel Processing x x x x Hydrothermal synthesis x x x microemulsion processing x x x Bottom Up nanoemulsion processing x x x Sonochemical processing x x x Gas phase synthesis plasma vaporization x chemical vapour synthesis x laser ablation x Production in liquid CO2 x x x x Use of scaffolds (polymer) x x 34 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Technology matrix: Industry-related fields NanoParticles Manufacturing automotive aerospace lubricants for paints, smart catalysis electronics Techniques industrial coatings components Deposition techniques lithography x x x x x x Top Down vacuum coating x x x x x x spray coating x x x x X x Mechanical ball milling x x x x x planetary grinding x x x x x Wet chemistry Sol-Gel Processing x x x x x Hydrothermal synthesis x x x x x x microemulsion processing x x x x x Bottom Up nanoemulsion processing x x x x x Sonochemical processing x x x x x Gas phase synthesis plasma vaporization x x x x x chemical vapour synthesis x x x x x laser ablation x x x x x Production in liquid CO2 x x x x x x Use of scaffolds (polymer) x x x x x x 35 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Access all nanotechnology patents in the past 5 years For a series of nanotech patent landscapes  www.boliven.com/landscapes  www.boliven.com/boliven_landscapes/ip_report/nanotec hnology_patent_review © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Outline• Executive Summary: Overview of findings• Survey: Your feedback on IP strategies, activities, budgets & issues• Methodology: Evidence-based understandings of trends• Context: Patenting in nanotech broadly• Findings: • NanoMaterials: Patent trends & examples • NanoManufacturing: Methods & application fields• Patent strategy conclusions: Nanotechnology• Appendix: CambridgeIP background & contacts 37 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nano-context: Volume/Quality requirements for nano-manufacturing We know some of the volume/quality requirements for nano- manufacturingHigh Scaffolds for Drug Fuel Cells tissue formulations/d engineering Photovoltaic elivery Medical Cosmetics Quality Requirements Diagnostics Catalysis Air purification Automotive Aerospace Water purification Industrial lubricants Paints/coatings Experimental applications Cement/ Construction Low Low Volume Requirements High The key question will be which are the technologies that become adopted/accepted in each of these fields? As the technology matures, the different industry field requirements will determine industrial R&D 38 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP: Evolving nanomaterials value chainR&D: Inventions & Discoveries, basic and applied Mixtures: Emulsions, Coatings, Composites, $$$ Raw materials: e.g. CNT, Products: Sports equipment, Quantum dots Components Seals, Drill bits $$$ Manufacture Integration Distribution $$$ $$$ Nanomaterials sub-spaces $$$ Services, Facilities, Equipment • End-markets and applications are likely to remain very diverse • The value chains are evolving but are disaggregated and are likely to remain so • There are overlaps between functions in the value chain but there appear to be few vertically integrated nanotech players • The value chain is surrounded by key service providers, facility providers, equipment providers and other supporters  Your position in the value chain will impact your business and patent strategies © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Nanotech IP conclusionsNanotechnology has cross-sectoral application, muchnanotechnology IP covers fundamental discoveries,some nanotech terms are still unsettled in the patentliterature:• Can result in unintentional overlapping granted patents (i.e., „patentthickets‟)• Can not be viewed in isolation – need to understand IP in thesurrounding „ecosystem‟ of suppliers, partners, competitors and in end-usesectors• Traditional strengths in the USA and Europe with increasingly strongshowings from Asia, especially China Many technologies One third of survey respondents indicated that they faced a patent thicket require many in their focus area, half face blocking patents iterations beforeA number of challenges before its full commercial arriving at a market ready form – this ispotential is realised: not unique to• Lack of large scale manufacturing techniques nanotech• Challenge of cost effective production• Health/toxicity/safety concerns• Very long time to market for nano-products• Unclear regulatory framework – affecting investment decisions into R&Dand manufacturing capacity © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

…and finally… Feel free to discuss your specific technology intelligence requirements with Quentin or Ilian Visit CambridgeIP‟s www.boliven.com for free patent searches For a series of nanotech patent landscapes  www.boliven.com/landscapes Quentin Tannock Ilian Iliev (Chairman and Founder) Thank you ! (CEO and Founder) Quentin.tannock@cambridgeip.com ilian.iliev@cambridgeip.com GSM +44 -077-862-10305 GSM: +44-077-863-73965 Tel: +44-1223 778 846 Tel: +44-1223 778 846 Corporate office Internet resources Website: www.cambridgeip.com Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd www.boliven.com 8a Kings Parade, Cambridge Blog: www.cambridgeip.com/blog CB2 1SJ, United Kingdom UK: +44 (0) 1223 777 846 Sign up for our free newsletter Fax: +44 (0) 20 3357 3105 on our home page 41 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Appendix Outline• Appendix: CambridgeIP background & contacts • Nanotech Case Studies: Examples of past work • CambridgeIP snapshot • CambridgeIP experience • CambridgeIP team • Contacts 43 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CS 1: Rapid mapping of large nanotech spaces - UKnanotechnology patent audit Client profile Senior executives from a publically funded organisation approached CambridgeIP for assistance in mapping a broad section of t he UK nanotechnology space Business situation• A key driver was the need to inform our clients‟ strategy in this complex and patent intensive space• Our remit was to assist client executives develop a clear understanding of the existing landscape, identify areas of relative strength & weakness and existing R&D collaborations, analyse trends and provide statistical information & benchmarking data for use in business planning and stakeholder reports Our approach• Working with CambridgeIP and senior industry experts we developed and implemented a complex patent search strategy• Results were analysed using our proprietary tools and methods and a focus area for deep analysis was identified• A workshop was conducted for client executives with our internal experts, assisting interpretation and dissemination of findi ngs Results and benefits• Identification of fundamental technologies and key actors • Insights into corporate R&D collaborations - identiifying key players in the• Identification of areas of strength together with technologies applicable to patent space, together with their overlapping relationships multiple sectors of application for future focus by our client • Independent and fact-based assessments of the client organisations impact• Understanding of recent M&A activity with significant impacts on the on UK IP assets, valuable in stakeholder reporting ownership of the UK‟s nanotechnology IP assets 44 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CS 2: University spin-off, competitor strategy analysisusing patent-based Intelligence Client profile A top UK University spin-out approached us for an IP Landscape report. Business situation • The client was backed by a major UK government funding organisation. • The CEO of the company required deep intelligence about industry incumbents‟ R&D strategy. • The client also needed independent analysis of the industry‟s patent landscape for use in technology licensing negotiations a nd structuring a strategic partnership. Our approach Results and benefits • Working with the client‟s senior technical and business • The resulting patent-based intelligence was used in representatives we defined the client‟s technology and market negotiations by our client. spaces • The client felt that the findings on competitors‟ patenting • We identified two technology focus areas of critical activity helped secure a go-ahead for a joint venture with a importance to the client‟s technology with the client and major industry player: “The strategic partner‟s reaction to the performed an IP Landscape report these two areas report‟s findings was startling: immediately inviting us to their HQ to meet with their Head of Development to finalize an agreement towards jointly developing a product.” • The report has also been used by the client when applying for participation Framework 7 programs, by demonstrating the client‟s deep knowledge of the industry‟s patenting trends. Competitor Analysis of Technology Focus in Clients Field Assignee Rank by # of Total # Year of Total Patents Portfolio 5 Year Name Patents in Patents in entry into in Overall Proportion Growth of The example shows how patent data can be Client Tech. Client Tech. the field Industry of Tech. in Focus used to analyse the R&D strategy of Space Space Space Field competitors, and to develop licensing strategy. Company 1 1 37 1993 6,576 1.6% 48.6% The findings suggest that Company 7 is Company 2 2 25 1998 33 100.0% 56.0% aggressively expanding into the client‟s field: it Company 3 3 19 1997 2,007 7.1% 15.8% has the highest growth rate of patenting Company 4 4 16 1992 1,646 2.1% 62.5% activity. In turn Company 2 is most dependent Company 5 5 14 1999 840 7.2% 92.9% Company 6 6 11 1995 8,838 4.1% 63.6% on this field for its strategic success: 100% of Company 7 15 6 2003 400 1.8% 100.0% its patents are in the field of focus. © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CS 3: IP Landscape® - nano-sensor devices Client profile A medium sized VC funded company delivering nano-enabled sensing solutions to the defense and homeland security sectors approached CambridgeIP for assistance updating their IP portfolio and developing an up -to-date patent landscape Business situation • Sophisticated and well-advised client with good understanding of its IP space and competitors, holding a relatively large patent portfolio. • Key drivers were to improve understanding of adjacent IP spaces, increase efficiency and structure in IP intelligence gatheri ng activities, inform investor communications Our approach • We audited the client‟s patent holdings, developing indexed and cross-referenced patent databases; We defined the client‟s space and identified adjacent spaces, undertaking IP Landscape and benchmarking analysis against the client‟s existing portfolio. Busi ness intelligence and key statistics were extracted using the RedEyeTM suite of tools. Results and benefits • Identified technology migration opportunities & threats from adjacent technology spaces • Demonstrated client‟s dominance of aspects of its IP Landscape • The client used our independent findings and analysis in presentations to VC investors, as part of a successful Series C funding round. • Identified existing, known, players and new entrants to the client‟s core IP space – including newly active academic institutes and corporations • Improved organisation of the client‟s existing portfolio, laying a foundation for future portfolio management • Identified portfolio gaps for our client to plug and areas for consideration in future patent filings 46 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CS 4: Accelerate licensing strategy development –early stage surgical materials technology Client profile A leading UK University asked us to help identify market opportunities for an early stage surgical materials development Business situation • Previous market research had not resulted in uptake of the technology by corporate prospects • A go / stop decision point was imminent as international PCT roll-out of an initial patent application approached Our approach Results and benefits • 20+ organisations were identified, were categorised by type and arranged in order of priority for approach by our client • Marketing objectives and recommendations were made in relation to each organisation type • Key geographical markets containing high profile licensing prospects were identified for addition to PCT designated states lists • Information on similar approaches, including diagrams, were provided • We defined the technology space and implemented a multi-layer to client academic experts in a convenient format search strategy that aimed at identifying • licensing candidates • potential collaboration partners • key markets & applications • critical geographical areas • Information useful to marketing the technology • Results and recommendations were presented to the client in a PowerPoint summary report, and cross-referenced Excel dataset • A workshop with the clients TTO representatives and client‟s academic experts aids understanding and dissemination of results and recommendations 47 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP - a provider of actionable patent-basedtechnology intelligence• IP Landscape® informing IP, R&D and investment strategy: – Our global IP databases, proprietary methodologies and consulting provide unique patent landscape coverage, highlighting technology “white space” and informing your own FTO due diligence efforts• Competitive intelligence: – Database-driven analysis and custom reporting on who the competitors are, where they are located, when they became active and who they are partnered with• Identify prospective partners, acquisitions and clients: – Information on top corporate, university and governmental partner/acquisition candidates operating in your area of interest, or could leverage your technologies• Technology foresight: – Foresight on emerging technology patterns, technology hotspots and investment strategy• CambridgeIP‟s technology platforms: – www.boliven.com industry leading patent search platform – IP Landscape® report standard – Proprietary software analytics and workflow platform 49 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP and open innovation Fact-based technology intelligence through science literature analysis and expert interviews Identify key players  Identify key players, R&D relationships and their intensity  Find relevant technology examples, diagrams and descriptions  Understand trends by technology, geography, application and other factors  Confirm freedom to operate and identify expired/abandoned patents  Inform IP and technology valuations Expert partnering, M&A and IP acquisition advice and contacts derived in over 120 major technology scouting and technology mapping projects  Expert in decomposing products into their component parts and identifying technology ownership, overlapping technology areas and cross-over technologies  Rapid identification of IP-related strengths and weaknesses that can be exploited/plugged with open innovation techniques  Our understanding of the technology trends and activity of key players helps inform your open innovation and partnering strategy  Due diligence on external partners and technologies CxO compatible materials, workshops and seminars  Accelerating internal communication  Facilitating effective technology transfer Which technology components are you ready to license out? Which ones should you acquire? 50 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

IP Landscape ® reports: informing IP, R&D andinvestment strategy CambridgeIP‟s IP Landscape® report standard Inventor and collaborator networks informs: • IP strategy development and execution • Development of freedom to operate (FTO) and white space analyses • Investors‟ due diligence and strategic overview of a space • Identify prior art in a spaceDecomposition of complex products and processes drives an intelligentpatent research program Needle Free Pen Shape Electronic Prior art analysis helps identify key IP risks in a space injector AutoInjectorDisposable x xCartridge x x xDrug Mixing x x xSingle dose x x xMulti Dose x xNeedle x x xRetractable x x x Drug reconstitutionShield x x xPiston x x xSpring x x xHigh Pressure x x x DesignPump x x xAir Jet xDisplay x x xLCD Screen x x xMechanical x x xAuto-Activation x x x ElectronicMechanic x x xSensor x x xData Storage x x xMechanic x x xElectronic x x xDose control x x xMechanic x x xElectronic 51 x x x Needle Monitoring © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Competitive intelligenceKey benchmarks and comparisons against key competitors or alliances• Strengths and weaknesses of patent portfolios• Inventor and collaborator networks• Evolution of R&D focus• Technology value chain mapping Technology value chain mapping Evolution of R&D focus 52 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Technology foresight Emerging technologies in electrical energy storageTechnology foresight activities helping you identify:• Emerging technology trends• Industry white space analysis• Investment opportunities• Key technology market scenarios Technology maturity and market requirements drive likely market adoption Nanoparticle Manufacturing Techniques: As the technology matures, the different industry field requirements will determine industrial R&D Linking technology potential to marketHigh attractiveness Scaffolds for Drug Fuel Cells tissue formulations/d engineering elivery Photovoltaic Quality Requirements Medical Cosmetics Diagnostics Air purification Catalysis Where should we invest ? Automotive Aerospace Water purification Target Industrial Opportunities lubricants Paints/coatings Experimental applications Cement/ Construction Low Market Low Volume Requirements High Attractiveness 53 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Technology market review Technology evolution maps:Technology market review reports provide a review of migration and interdependencieskey development areas as they correspond to current IPC Map 2000and future market niches, helping: • Corporate investment and M&A strategy in rapidly developing markets • Inform in-house R&D strategy IPC Map 2007 • Support public sector innovation support strategies • Assist young technology companies in prioritising key market segments and identifying strategic partnersTechnology tree and categorisation: identifying key solutions andexample technologies Analysis of key participants in complex systems 54 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP‟s technology and knowledge platformsCambridgeIP‟s offerings are based on a combination of:• Proprietary software and workflow platforms tested through more than 100 real life projects• A 100 million document database of patent and non-patent literature• Quality assurance and report standards that ensure consistency in the outputs for our clients• The Boliven.com online platform of technology literature search and analytics with 8,000+ registered users and 30,000+ unique visitors per month RedEye: our software analytics and workflow platform Boliven.com: a leading portal for R&D and IP professionals 55 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Our clientsWe have delivered more than 100 projects with leadingorganisations: including major corporations, research institutes,service providers, high-tech SMEs and investors Selected clients: … and other leading big pharma 57 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Thought leadership • CambridgeIP is a recognised thought leader in the technology intelligence space • Our research has been covered by Harvard Business Review, Financial Times and other leading media • Our collaborations include Chatham House, University of Sussex, Cambridge University‟s Judge Business School For a full list of publications, media coverage and presentations, please refer to 58 www.cambridgeip.com © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Healthcare and life sciences Medical Cell therapy Active devices Regenerative pharmaceutical medicine ingredients iPSC Biopharmaceuticals Diagnosis Tissue engineering Tissue Targeting Tele health Cell based vaccines Drug Conjugation Molecular-based Vaccines tests Blood Glucose Monitoring Molecular Immunology Heart rate Asthma/COPD engineering Monitoring Transplant Markers Blood pressure Tissue Targeting Gene silencing monitoring Nano-reagents Therapy Auto-injectors Inhalers Pharmaceutical Addiction formulations therapies Surgery Excipients Nicotine Endoscopy Carriers Ultrasound Liposomes Wound healing Propellants 59 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Cleantech and energy focus areas Wind energy Fuel cells Nano devices systems & materials Biomass Advanced Geothermal refrigeration energy Systems Photovoltaic & Clean coal Refineries, component carbon capture power gen, Technologies CO2-EOR co-gen. Concentrated Marine transport Consortia & solar & other research energy storage alliances Systems Smart grid 60 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Telecommunications and electronics Wireless authentication Geographical Systems Physical/Remote access control GIS measurements Merchant/Purchasing Satellite navigation/GPS Digital credentials Clean tech Telecoms standards Smart grid ETSI Smart meters Continua alliance Transport management RFID Distributed sensor systems Blue tooth Energy harvesting Near field communication Radio frequency identification Internet & data handling Search Hardware Cloud computing Card readers Data fusion Routers Database replication Mems Flexible displays Contactless card Mobile devices/applications Satellite communications E-reader Mobile search Application software e-Health Media convergence Remote diagnostics 3G/4G/WiFi Device access control 61 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Selected team members Quentin Tannock Ilian Iliev Dr Robert Brady Mark Meyer Ralph Poole Vladimir YossifovChairman & co-founder CEO & co-founder Non-Exec Director Business Development Boston Geneva Representative Manager Representative North America Arthur Lallement Helena van der Merwe Sarah Helm Yanjun Zhao Senior Associate Senior Associate Senior Associate Senior Associate 63 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Key team members 1 Quentin Tannock (Chairman & co-founder)  Prior experience: founder of a successful company in the chemical sector; law lecturer; facilitated major R&D collaborations at Cambridge University (Electronics, Photonics & Nanotechnology); member of Lambert working group tasked by government to draft model contracts for industry-university collaborations; IP analysis & strategic advice to nanotechnology venture capitalists; assisting Cambridge University Institute of Biotechnology start-ups (bio-nano diagnostic devices) with commercial and fundraising strategies  Education: Law, (Roman-Dutch, Common Law, International Law in Cambridge & elsewhere) Ilian Iliev (CEO & co-founder)  Prior experience: strategy & innovation advisory work for a Magic Circle law firm; award-winning biotech start-up in Cambridge; policy advice; 1990s: founded and ran a 100+ employee business in the electrical industry in Southern Africa  Education: Economics and Management; Ccmpleting a PhD on „Innovation Finance‟ at the Judge Business School, Cambridge University Dr Robert Brady (non-Exec. Director)  Prior experience: Founder of Brady plc a leading supplier of transaction and risk management software solutions to companies and banks operating in the metals and minerals, energy and soft commodity sectors. Dr Brady acts as an active mentor and advisor for several growth companies, specializing in information technology and services. He is the current treasurer of Cambridge Angels investment group.  Education: fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he specialized in the field of physics. 64 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

Key team members 2 Mark Meyer (Houston Representative and Head of North America)  Mark leads our North America business development, and is based in Texas  Mark has more than 20 years of oil and gas experience and 25 years of business development experience  VP and Director level assignments at independent oil & gas companies, international oil companies, energy sector startups and high tech firms.  Mark has been recognized by the Harvard Business Review, Gartner Group and IBM Corporation for best practices in business transformation and business development.  Education: BS in Chemical Engineering from The University of Texas at Austin. Ralph Poole (Boston Representative)  Assists CambridgeIP in knowledge management and taxonomy methodology development  Supports our client base out of Boston  Former Chief Knowledge Officer at Ernst &Young LLP and Cap Gemini; former partner at Boston Consulting Group and Bain & Company; Vladimir Yossifov (Geneva Representative)  Assists CambridgeIP with relationships with patent authorities and the Swiss market  More than 35 years of executive experience in intellectual property, transfer of technology, licensing, innovation and IP infrastructure development.  Former director at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) for regional IP information and Innovation promotion systems in countries of Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Caribbean 65 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

…and finally… Feel free to discuss your specific technology intelligence requirements with Quentin or Ilian Visit CambridgeIP‟s www.boliven.com for free patent searches Thank you ! Quentin Tannock Ilian Iliev (Chairman and Founder) (CEO and Founder) Quentin.tannock@cambridgeip.com ilian.iliev@cambridgeip.com GSM +44 -077-862-10305 GSM: +44-077-863-73965 Tel: +44-1223 778 846 Tel: +44-1223 778 846 Corporate office Internet resources Website: www.cambridgeip.com Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd www.boliven.com 8a Kings Parade, Cambridge Blog: www.cambridgeip.com/blog CB2 1SJ, United Kingdom UK: +44 (0) 1223 777 846 Sign up for our free newsletter Fax: +44 (0) 20 3357 3105 on our home page 66 © 2011 Cambridge Intellectual Property Ltd. All rights reserved

CambridgeIP Nanomaterials Trends

by CambridgeIP Ltd on Jun 10, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 3

Statistics

CambridgeIP Nanomaterials Trends — Presentation Transcript