Converting STEM Doctoral Dissertations into Patent Applications: A Study of Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, and Chemical Engineering Dissertations from CIC Institutions.
Doctoral candidates may request short-term embargoes on the release of their dissertations in order to apply for patents. This study examines how often inventions described in dissertations in chemical engineering, chemistry, physics, and mathematics are converted into U.S. patent applications, as well as the relationship between dissertation approval dates and patent application filing dates. Dissertations approved in 2008 by the 13 Committee on Institutional Cooperation universities provided the sample populations. Authors were searched as inventors in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Applications Full-text database to identify relevant patent applications. The number of dissertations yielding applications varied by discipline. Mathematics had none; chemical engineering had the most. The majority of applications in chemical engineering and chemistry were filed either prior to or in the same month as the dissertation approval dates; all of those in physics were filed after them. These results will be of interest to librarians, administrators, advisors, and anyone else associated with determining and approving embargoes for dissertations, as well as science and engineering librarians working with graduate students interested in patenting the results of their research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
American Chemical Society, Committee on Professional Training. 2007. ACS Directory of Graduate Research 2007. Washington, DC: The Society.
American Chemical Society, Committee on Professional Training. 2009. ACS Directory of Graduate Research 2009. Washington, DC: The Society.
American Institute of Physics. 2008. Graduate Programs in Physics, Astronomy, and Related Fields, 2008. Melville, NY: The Institute.
Brougher, J.T. 2010. Publish, Present, or Perish: How the Internet and the "Printed Publication" Bar Affect the Dissemination of Research. Journal of Internet Law 14(1): 11-19.
Capano, K.M., Hoey, C.A. and Zuch, C.M. 1991. In Re Cronyn: Can Student Theses Bar Patent Applications? Journal of College and University Law 18(1), 105-119.
Carlson, S. 2003. Students Oppose Ohio State's Plan to Put Dissertations Online. Chronicle of Higher Education [Internet]. [Cited 2014 Dec 13]; 49(38): A33. Available from: http://chronicle.com/article/Students-Oppose-Ohio-States/24680/
Carpenter, R.L. and Vasu, E.S. 1978. Statistical Methods for Librarians. Chicago, IL: American Library Association, p 32-34.
Chiang, S.-t. 2005. The Theses and the Patent Application. Zhongguo tu shu guan xue hui bao 75: 185-193. (Article in Chinese with English abstract)
CIC Expansion - Introduction. [Internet]. [n.d.]. Champaign, IL: Committee on Institutional Cooperation. Available from: http://www.cic.net/about-cic/cic-expansion/introduction
Clement, G.P. 2013. American ETD dissemination in the age of open access: ProQuest, NoQuest, or allowing student choice. College and Research Libraries News [Internet]. [Cited 2014 Dec 13]; 74(11): 562-566. Available from: http://crln.acrl.org/content/74/11/562.full.pdf+html
Committee on Institutional Cooperation. [Internet]. [n.d.]. Champaign, IL: The Committee. Available from: http://www.cic.net/home
Copeland, R.G. and Meagher, T.F. 2005. Academics Must Protect Their Patent Rights. Chronicle of Higher Education [Internet]. [Cited 2014 Dec 13]; 51(38): B6. Available from: http://chronicle.com/article/Academics-Must-Protect-Their/24568/
Davis, A.R., Eyer, V. and Butkovich, N.J. 2014. Inventing the Future: Transforming Engineering Dissertations into Patent Applications. Poster presented Sept. 25, 2014 at the USETDA Conference, Orlando, FL.
Electronic Dissemination. [Internet]. 2014. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University, Graduate School. Available from: http://www.gradsch.ohio-state.edu/electronic-dissemination.html
Ex parte Hershberger. 96 U.S.P.Q. 54 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1953).
Fyffe, R. and Welburn, W.C. 2008. ETDs, scholarly communication, and campus collaboration: Opportunities for libraries. College and Research Libraries News [Internet]. [Cited 2013 July 27]; 69(3): 152-155. Available from: http://crln.acrl.org/content/69/3/152.full.pdf+html
Gray, A.W. 1957. When Are Published Inventions Patentable? Machine Design 29(7): 95-97.
Gulliksen v. Halberg v. Edgerton v. Scott. 75 U.S.P.Q. 252 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1937).
Hamilton Laboratories, Inc., v. Massengill. No. 8238, 111 F.2d 584; 1940 U.S. App. LEXIS 3697; 45 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 594.
In re Leo M. Hall. No. 85-2338, 781 F.2d 897 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In re Marshall W. Cronyn. No. 89-1434, 890 F.2d 1158; 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 17805; 13 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1070.
In the Matter of the Application of John William Bayer. No. 77-570, 568 F.2d 1357; 1978 CCPA LEXIS 338; 196 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 670.
Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011. H.R. 1249, 112th Congr., 1st Session. (2011). [Cited 2015 Feb 26]. Available from: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1249enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1249enr.pdf
Lippincott, J.K. and Lynch, C.A. 2010. ETDs and Graduate Education: Programs and Prospects. Research Library Issues [Internet]. [Cited 2013 Jul 27]; (270): 6-15. Available from http://publications.arl.org/rli270/7
Lowry, C.B. 2006. ETDs and Digital Repositories -- a Disciplinary Challenge to Open Access? portal: Libraries and the Academy [Internet]. [Cited 2011 Oct 1]; 6(4): 387-393. DOI: 10.1353/pla.2006.0053
Minutes. [Internet]. [March 2013]. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Graduate Faculty Executive Committee. Available from: https://kb.wisc.edu/images/group156/34126/2013MarchMinutes.pdf
Mugridge, R.L. and Kellerman, L.S. 2003. Electronic Theses and Dissertations: Issues and Options. In Charleston Conference Proceedings 2002. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, pp 168-175.
Nelson, C. 1997. Virginia Tech Sets New Net Policy. Library Journal 122(14): 105.
Oppenheim, C. 1985. Patent novelty; proposals for change and their possible impact on information scientists. Journal of Information Science [Internet]. [Cited 2011 Oct 7]; 10: 181-186. DOI: 10.1177/016555158501000408
Palladino, D.R. 1999. The Publication Bar: How Disclosing an Invention to Others Can Jeopardize Potential Patent Rights. Duquesne Law Review 37: 353-370.
Peterson's. 2008. Peterson's Graduate Programs in the Physical Sciences, Mathematics, Agricultural Sciences, the Environment & Natural Resources, Book 4, 2008. Lawrenceville, NJ: Peterson's.
Pierotti, N.P. 2002. Does Internet Information Count as a Printed Publication? IDEA -- The Journal of Law and Technology 42: 249-278.
Risch, M. 2015. Personal communication to B. Karl, 17 February 2015.
Simmons, E.S. 1995. Intellectual Property and the Internet: 'You Can't Sell It If You Give It Away'. Searcher 3(1): 38, 40-41.
Stim, R. 2012. Patent, Copyright & Trademark, 12th ed. Berkeley, CA: Nolo, pp 84, 117, 143.
United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2014a. 2128.01 Level of Public Accessibility Required [R-11.2013]. I. A thesis placed in a university library may be prior art if sufficiently accessible to the public. In Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, 9th ed. (March 2014). [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. (Cited 2015 Jan 8). Available from: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2128.html
United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2014b. 706.02 Rejection on Prior Art [R-11.2013]. In General. In Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, 9th ed. (March 2014). [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. (Cited 2015 Jan 8). Available from: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s706.html#d0e58220
United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2014c. 2103 Patent Examination Process [R-11.2013]. In Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, 9th ed. (March 2014). [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. (Cited 2015 Jan 9). Available from: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2103.html
Utts, J.M. and Heckard, R.F. 2007. Mind on Statistics, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education, p 79.
van Staveren, M. 2009. Prior art searching on the Internet: Further insights. World Patent Information [Internet]. [Cited 2013 July 27]; 31(1): 54-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.wpi.2008.08.001
Veraldi, K. 2013. Personal communication, 11 July 2013.
Vick, J.E. 1990. Publish and perish: the printed publication as a bar to patentability. American Intellectual Property Law Association Quarterly Journal 18: 235-261.
Wright, J.M. 2003. A Contemporary Patent Act: Finding a Useful Definition of "Printed Publication" in the Age of the Internet and On-line Research. Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society 85: 732-750.
Yamane, T. 1967. Statistics; An Introductory Analysis, 2nd ed. New York: Harper & Row, p 581-582.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2015 Nancy J. Butkovich
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.