One of the hardest decisions associated with patents and intellectual property is determining what to do with them. There are many paths one can pursue without any true guarantee of what the result could be. This is where Patent Rank is best utilized. Our system brings light to the obscurity often associated with decision-making. At the portfolio level we can distinguish quantity from quality; at the patent level we can discern winners from losers. As such, it most certainly has practical value to venture capitalists and others interested in objectively assessing innovation, both internally and externally. Above all, it can help investors discern the winners from the losers and, among the winners, find those that are worth pursuing. Ultimately, this allows you to choose wisely in your assessment and management of your patent innovations. Also, at the corporate level, it helps in the due diligence associated with appraising potential acquisitions, strategic alliances, or joint ventures.
Kary Mullis and DNA
Let’s use a real world example to help explain this concept further. Two of the most prolific patents of the modern era belong to an entrepreneurial firm (Cetus) that did not survive due to delays in the FDA approval of a drug and the resulting funding crisis (Wikipedia 2010)1. These two patents involve process innovations that defined the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which allows DNA to be cloned (Mullis, Ferre, and Gibbs 1994)2. Kary Mullis, the inventor on these two patents (#4,683,202 and #4,683,195), received the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for this scientific breakthrough (Nobel Prize 1993, Wikipedia 2011)3. In 1991, because of a major funding crisis, Cetus was sold to Chiron (who was later acquired by No-vartis). These patent innovations revolutionized the genetic biotechnology industry, yet the original firm that invented the process and held the patent failed. In our estimation, it was in fact the investors who failed because the innovation has proved its merit to society and is the basis of the current multi-billion dollar industry. Why did the investors fail to save Cetus? Where was the objective assessment of the value of these patent innovations? We believe that the Patent Rank methodology could have helped those involved with Cetus to better assess and ultimately manage this radical innovation. Utilizing our outlined technique, the patents at that time could have been assessed based on their trajectories, which by our estimation were unprecedented. This technique better informs decision makers in the management and prospecting of innovation.
MyPatentAssets Dashboard for Patent #4,683,195:
The Future of Innovation
What will be the next radical innovation to rival Mullis’ revolutionary patents? We hope that our methodology can help determine that as well. Objectively assessing innovation as radical and thereafter appropriately managing it as such is the essence of successful business venturing. Whether the venturing is internal or external, insights gained from Patent Rank research can help you as the decision maker appraise patent innovations in a nonpartisan manner. Patent Rank coupled with the mathematical models we have created provide a method to use market information about the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent network to assess individual patents and patent portfolios in a way that makes sense to anyone. We can promise that Patent Rank will point you in the right direction and give what is needed to take off with your innovation and achieve long-term success and prosperity. Stop sitting on that intellectual property of yours and do something with it!
Patent No. 5571247 | Self Containing Enclosure for Protection from Killer Bees | A self contained protective enclosure with an opening for entry and egress and a screen for ventilation and viewing.
, Patent Storm
1Wikipedia. 2010. Page Rank. (Accessed: October 10, 2010).
2Mullis, Kary B., Francois Ferre, Richard A. Gibbs, eds. 1994. The Polymerase Chain Reaction. Birkhaser: Boston, MA.
3Nobel Prize. 1993. The Novel Prize in Chemistry 1993: Kary B. Mullis and Michael Smith. (Accessed: February 1, 2011).
3Wikipedia. 2011. Kary Mullis. (Accessed: March 25, 2011).