Session 3-2: New Invention Disclosures at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center

M. D. Anderson Cancer Center
Date: February - April, 2008
Duration: 0 / 28:20

Elizabeth O. Hileman, Ph.D., Project Director, External Collaborations and Technology Discovery, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center

Narrator:

So I'll take more question as we go along. At this point, it is my honor to present Elizabeth Heilman, Miss Heilman how we call her.  Please no booing comes, from Texas A&M where you tea here and then made her Ph.D here at M. D. Anderson so it's kinda high grade between.

Ultimately.

Ultimately.  So she went from the dark world to the bright world and now worked in our Tech Transfer Office for many years and then worked with some faculty member and when he heard that she was somewhere out in that orbit, we grabbed her right away because we enjoy highly working with her while she has in the Tech Transfer Office who valued her contribution and today she is part of our office.  So if you combine, have question, she is one of the ones that gonna sit down and she, of course, brings all the expertise that I didn't have about technology transfer.  So with that set, she's gonna tell a little bit more what to do with your invention.  Please applause for Liz Heilman.

Liz Heilman:

Ohh.  Thanks anyway, so sweet.  Let's see if I can...It's okay I got it.  It's...I got it.  Okay.  Well thanks Oli for that really nice introduction and so Oli invited me to come today and talk to you guys about new invention disclosures here at the M. D. Anderson and as he mentioned, at one point, in my career I was a part of the office of technology commercialization and I worked there as a technology analyst and a large part of what I did and I actually still work with Tom Lee.  He's gonna follow me next and talk about license as in start ups.  And a big part of what I did back then was deal with invention disclosures from the faculty and as I look at in the audience today and actually over the past few weeks as well I see many familiar faces from when I was at OTC and so some of what I'm gonna present today may be familiar to some of you but for those of you that are not familiar with this process and except you need to take in order to disclose invention and why it's important, hopefully, I can give you a broad overview of that.  Before I dive right into the topic though, I thought it would be a good idea to give everyone sort of an overview of our office and so I'm a member of the office of technology discovery here at M. D. Anderson and that's actually a separate office from the Office of Technology Commercialization or OTC.  So OTC is gonna be the office that you will deal with as far as actually having a patent filing in any business transactions related to licensing and or start-up of your really just invention.  But Office of the Technology discovery were actually part of the Office of Translational Research here at M. D. Anderson surrounding the academic side of things and the umbrella of translational research is overseen by Dr. Bob Bast, who is the Vice-president for Translation Research here at M. D. Anderson.  So we all and report directly to Dr. Bast and of course our office is comprised of myself, Dr. Stan Tucker and Dr.Oli Wenker.  And so we actually interact with the faculty members sort of upstream of what you might consider of the traditional tech transfer and activities.  Our mission is pretty clear.  We were here to support use the faculty and staff inventors of M. D. Anderson, increase translational research and ultimately to help facilitate commercialization within M. D. Anderson.  So although we are separate entity from OTC, I have to say that we work very closely with that office on various projects and so we were in constant contact with them and we try to help streamline new inventions that our new discoveries from faculty and staff and work with OTC to determine what might perhaps the best route to go and what to do.  And so from our mission, we accomplish this in several ways and, first and for most, is technology development planning and so again we're in the early stages with the faculty.  Faculty will frequently contact us and say I have this really interesting observation or hey I have this really neat discovery.  Do you think...what should I do with this?  How do I move forward?  Is there something that I can really commercialize and so and like all will just sort of touching almost sit down; we'll meet with them or go through.  What is their data, what they found so far and what they plan to do and what they wanna do with their work and we try to guide them towards developing their technology and to perhaps marketable product that OTC then can take and actually license or build the start-up around.  In addition to that, we also work a lot with outside pharmaceutical companies.  And Stan Tucker and myself, actually spend a significant amount of time working on strategic alliances on the broad institutional level for all of M. D. Anderson and this is really   meant to bring in I guess more funding for preclinical and clinical research here at M. D. Anderson and also provides hopefully our faculty faster access to the newest and best drugs that the pharmacies have to offer.  But in addition to that, if you as a faculty member wanting to collaborate with industry in any level, you certainly can contact us and we can put you in touch with many of our former partners that we have current agreements with.  And the third bullet point here, we can also provide access to funding and this is referred to internally as the Technology Review Committee or TRC Funding and I know Keith just talked about the Texas Ignition Fund and that model is very similar to what TRC's model is and that these are not research funds.  These are meant specifically to drive your invention towards commercialization.  So our office, myself, Stanley, and Oli will help you form a project team and we'll help you for the proposals together with very specific commercialization milestones and budgets attached to those milestones and help you go to the TRC and ask for funding.  And OTC is very involved with that and that's really where we interphase with the OTC a lot and OTC is a member of the Technology Review Committee and so this is a great example of how our two offices work together to help move inventions towards commercialization with any institution.  And the last bullet point here which is obviously the topic of my discussion with you today is we help facilitate invention disclosure to OTC and this is really important and again many of you maybe seasoned inventors and have done this many times.  A lot of the time though, there are many faculty members or either new to the institution or junior faculty and aren't the process by which to go or maybe you've been here for a long time and you just aren't really sure if you should disclose and this is really where we step in and can help the faculty inventor to move forward.  I know some of these bullet points on why disclosing your inventions is so important.  I know this has been touched on both a little today and also in previous weeks but I just can't emphasize it enough.  First and for most, any of the policy people or the legal people with any institution are going to preach to you that disclosure of your inventions is an obligation of your employment here at M. D. Anderson and so and if nothing else, you have to do it based on your employment contract with the institution.  And Keith also mentioned this earlier and I know I will state it here again, it's a Federal requirement if your invention is made with Federal grant money, for example, NCI, NIH, DOD, all of these things require the institution to report this and actually if I'm not mistaken, sure we can't send OTC as still the individual that does this and it's very important that we keep up with these and you can imagine in an institution the size of M. D. Anderson, how hard it can be to actually track this and so we rely on the use of the inventor to really report this.  Perhaps the third bullet point, may be the most important, on this slide and that is the public benefit from your invention and lab discoveries can only really be realized if it's brought to the market place and so many people and you know again they asked why disclose and for no other reason, you can't really help in our situation here at M. D. Anderson being the patients that come here everyday and nothing can really help the patients unless it's actually transferred to the market place.  And then of course financial benefit is always possible, should the inventions be successfully commercialized and your license or start-up or whatever the commercialization activity maybe related to that.  So these are all really important reasons to keep in mind for why you should always be thinking about these when you're creating things in a laboratory setting.  So if you believe that you do have an invention, there are three main criteria that are defined by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that determine whether or not your invention can be protected by a patent for example.  And these criteria may give you at least a preliminary idea as to whether you have an invention that can be protected and perhaps commercialize.  And I always like to list this out just because I know that people always ask, what are their requirements for patentability?  So of course your invention must be useful and I think that the scientist of course can identify a used quarter.  You probably wouldn't be working towards this.  So usefulness is typically easy to show and more difficult in some cases is novelty and non-obviousness.  And so of course novelty cannot be previously identified in any patent literatures, scientific literature, any other prior art of any kind out there and non-obviousness relates to...it cannot be obvious based on the prior art that's known to a person having ordinary skill in the field and can just go and read it, the prior art will like oh!  Let me put A plus B together, that's obvious.  And Tommy maybe able to give you a little bit better idea on this because OTC is dealing with this all the time now especially with more strange requirements coming down from the USPTO; but non-obviousness is really becoming, I think, more and more difficult to overcome if it's identified.  So some types of inventions and I always like to list this out as well just to give you an idea that coming from cancer center, composition of matter maybe something that we can immediately think of, oh, a new drug that treat cancer.  That's a great example of composition in matter but also just as important in certain cases is identifying a new method of use for example a drug.  Perhaps, you're looking at an immunological drug but you've identified that no one really else has looked up before that it's also active in breast cancer or ovarian cancer or leukemia or whatever it maybe; such a known composition of matter but you've identified a new method of use for that so that's also something to think about.  And of course new devices, new research tools.  This relates to, for example, cell lines, knockout mice and different methods of manufacture.  So once you've identified that yes I have an invention, now what will I need to do.  And of course you can always go directly to the Office of Technology Commercialization or OTC.  But if you're not really sure, again, coming back to well how do I move forward?  What do I do?  You can always contact one of us and Stan, Oli or myself through the Office of Technology discovery and if you contact us, we're gonna sit down and we're gonna meet with you and we're gonna go over everything with you and we're gonna help you plan.  When you need to do certain things, is it too early now to consider for commercialization to OTC funding or is this a great time to move right forward and you're already planning your next steps and have you disclosed it?  We always, always.  We can't stop preaching this and that how do you disclose the invention and if not, we are gonna urge to submit what we call an invention disclosure report or IDR.  And the IDR, I know Keith kinda related to this about, some of them are simple and some of them are more detailed.  I think the more detailed one is coming.  This is my experience coming from a Tech Transfer Office at one point in my life but the more detailed it is, the more valuable it is, I think, to the tech transfer people and so that I, again the more time you spend on this and the more valuable it will be and possibly the quicker things we can look forward.  Our IDR here at the M. D. Anderson encompasses many different points and bullet points and some of the important ones here, the creators of the invention or the inventors, public disclosures, in conferences and details of the invention.  I'm gonna go through each one of these in the following slides and a bit more detailed.  So, of course the creators of the invention.  Now these are the persons or people involved in the conception or creation of the inventions and the IDR is gonna ask you to list up the people's names and describe their creative activity and not only do that but then they're gonna also asked you to define the percent contribution and this is really important that to determine and because I think and again, correct me if I'm wrong, Tom but this is what is to use later.  Based on this percent contribution this is what is to use later.  Should any revenue be realized from your invention and the pay back that goes to the inventor.  This is gonna be broken down by this percent contribution.  And I always like to also put this slide in here about inventorship and this is a matter of patent law.  That's the bottom line here and it is not the same as authorship and frequently this is sometimes difficult for especially scientist to really grasp onto.  Just because the publication that you're working on has eight or ten authors on it does not mean that you have eight or ten inventors on the invention that the publication encompasses and that something to really think about and again it comes back to who was involved with the conception of the invention.  I understand that laboratory technicians, for example, are very important in moving your work forward.  You probably couldn't get a lot of this done and publications published unless you had that extra work in your hands in the lab.  But those types of people that are just simply carrying out experiments under your direction for example would probably likely not be an inventor and so thus those kinds of people probably shouldn't be named on the invention disclosure report or on any patent following that would occur.  An inventorship is just for your knowledge is determined at two times and we're talking about patent filings.  First, determine at the time of the filing itself when the first claims are drafted and then again a patent issuance.  And this is important to think about just because you have one set of inventors at the time of filing does not necessarily mean that it will be the same set at issuance because the claims can evolve overtime, over the examination and prosecution of the patents and the claims that are actually issued at the end will dictate who the final inventors are.  Public disclosures.  The IDR is going to also ask you about public disclosures and a lot of times, people just skip over this section and I think it's really important to emphasize and because of course any public disclosure can impact your patent ability.  This is what I'm talking about prior disclosures.  If you've got anything that you've already published, you've already presented this at ACR last year or you're about to present for example at ACR this year and I'll just take this opportunity to plug that if you do have something in ACR that you feel covers and invention that you have not disclosed; you probably need to act on that pretty quickly 'cause ACR is going to release those abstracts publicly online, I believe on March 15th.  So this is something to think about.  And public disclosure means anything really in the public domain.  I've listed out an array of things here including your manuscripts, your posters, your abstracts and you're talking about ASCO/AACR top of things.  Seven hours that you might give outside of the institution and including job interviews and this is important too for example post stocks.  If you're out interviewing for a job interview, of course you're presenting on your work that you'd accomplished so far and it's important to know that again if you have not this clear or you're about to prepare for example to get a job interview, similar for job interview you probably need to go and disclose the OTC anything that you feel is a true invention in that presentation.  Of course, anything on the web, online publications, postings, and even verbal conversations.  I also didn't put in writing here but let me emphasize, it's also a great idea and Keith eluded this a moment ago to let OTC know as far in advance as you possibly can.  When you have plan to public disclosure so if you're saying okay I'm working on this with you know on a paper and we're gonna submit to cell on you know April 5th, let OTC know.  They need to know where things are going.  They need to know when you're gonna send it and you maybe thinking well I don't know what's gonna go back and forth with eventual revisions and that doesn't matter.  Let OTC know as soon as you're going to be planning your submission.  And in conferences, this isn't really spelled out as the word in conferences on the IDR you don't believe.  But this is gonna be where they ask questions about others that may lay claim to your invention and this is gonna really be important when you're talking about different sources of funding especially when you're dealing with the sponsor research agreement for example.  If you have an SRA or sponsor research agreement with an outside company, chances are that there is some IP closes in that contract and you need to let OTC know and there's a specific section on the ITR that says do you have any contractual relationship or outside funding?  Yes, then you need to spell it out.  And then OTC goes and checks that to see what kind of claim to this invention based on the funding that came in for it that that company might have.  Same as true for material transfer agreements, many of you will receive a compound from outside the institution and those material transfer agreements are very important or you may send something, a specimen or something outside of the institution. And let me also give the opportunity to say, don't ever send anything without doing an under material transfer agreement right? And so this also includes any clinical trial release.  Any of these contractual things, software agreements and also it's important to know that if one of the inventors is employed elsewhere outside of M. D. Anderson.  And this is not a true hurdle to commercialization or anything like that; we just need to know who you're working with, if you're working with Dr. X at Stanford, that's great.  We just need to know that it's from Stanford and that will cue OTC to get in touch with Stanford and start working out okay how are we gonna do this?  Who's gonna take the lead on commercialization and how we're gonna break this out later and so it's really important to note this to OTC.   And then once you've gotten all of that other information out of the way, of course the most vital information may very well be that's your details of your invention.  What is the product?  That saying is simple but a lot of the time when people are disclosing, they're giving very elaborate scientific reasons for why they went this route and that's all very important that you really need to spell out for OTC what the product is.  What can they market here?  They really can't market in observation.  What are you gonna...what are you really driving towards based on your observation?  These are the things that you really have to spell out.  How is that product competitively, what are the competitive advantages of that product?  In other words, how is it faster, how is it cheaper or how is it better than what's already known in the market?  Again, it seemed like really hardcore business type of approach but, you as the inventor, are probably gonna know your market better than anyone.  And so it's really important to help OTC and tell them exactly what you know, where the niches in the market that's missing and how you're gonna feel it.  And of course any data that you've obtained today, any proof of concept or proof of principle that you've achieved but what are your future plans?  Okay, you have gotten this far, you've have your invention, you've disclosed.  What are you gonna do now? And on a time people think that just okay, that's it.  No.  That's usually not right.  What do you plan to do and follow up with this and keep it driving towards commercialization?  And you also plan your any potential licensees and those questions on the ITR's and a lot of the time, licensing or business transactions happen simply because the inventor has been contacted directly by one of the companies.  This again, I'll use the AACR example.  You're presenting at AACR and Mark comes up after and says hey that was a fantastic presentation, what are you doing?  And this is when this is gonna cue you?  Oh my goodness, I probably should have disclosed to my tech transfer office but if not, that's fine.  Just come back and do it and you need to let OTC know.  If you have already disclosed or you're planning to disclose, let them know if one of the companies has approached you.  This is really the key because, then immediately, OTC can follow up and that's a really easy route to see what type of interest there really maybe on the other end.  Once all gotten the whole idea are completed and all inventors have signed and returned the IDR, then what do you do?  Well it's submitted again like I said to the Office of Technology Commercialization and OTC has meetings what they call assessment meetings every other week where they are reviewing the latest disclosures to the office.  And our office is also involved with that meeting and OTC sets and determines exactly what they need and next steps for protection might be and what might be the best route for commercialization.  And it is important to note OTC, of course, will handle all the negotiation of any business transactions related to licensing or start-up or anything like that.  But again, our office can help you move from your very early discoveries into the OTC side and how they will move it out from there.  And I wanted to put the royalty sharing policy.  I know Keith also said this but I think it's important in the list up here.  Because many times people will come to us and say what's the break out and we always say will, you know, you didn't check the policy and they are like, we don't know where the policy is so I just wanted to put it up here and UT system has the break out; it's 50 percent to the inventors and 50 percent to the institution and M. D. Anderson breaks out that 50 percent as I've listed here, 15 percent to the creator or creators, lab--to support the research and 10 percent also goes to the department chair.  More times than not, I'll say that the department chair will usually funnel that right back into the inventors labs because it was the inventor that brought the revenue in.  Technically, it's at the discretion of the chair but typically that's you know more times than not, that's how it happens and of course 25 percent to the institution itself.  So with that, I'm gonna end.  That was a quick talk but hopefully it was at least a general overview of why you should disclose and the important process and again, I'll just say it one more time, the more time you spend on your invention disclosure report, the more valuable it's gonna be.  That went to you but to your tech transfer officials that are trying to move that out into the market place.  So with that I'm gonna turn it over to Tom Lee unless there are any immediate questions.

Once you have filed IDR, are you free to discuss it in seminar or summit and others?

No.  Just because you disclose your invention to the Tech Transfer Office that doesn't mean you're automatically covered and there kinda any kind of confidentiality.  You still need to be aware of the fact that you need to be put in confidentiality agreements and place if you're going outside the institution.  If you're talking about meetings is what I'm talking about.  Now if you're gonna go to AACR like I said you need to let them know, that's a public thing.  You can't obviously have a CDA and place for that but if you're gonna go out and wanna talk to companies or go and talk with other individuals elsewhere, you need to be concerned about that okay, confidentialities out to place and Tom can probably comment more on that but if you have a patent filing and you know that's underway, you may not need to worry about public disclosure per se meeting like AACR, that's what I'm referring to.  Companies, always a CDA.

I have two questions.  First, invention has to be useful, novel, and non-obvious.  There are a lot of patterns on genes, just genes have been sequenced and we know what they are and know people how to put patterns on them and nobody can use them in any kind of translational applications?

And that will, okay so I'll just bring one comment on that.  Not a patent attorney.  First and for most but in my experience, those were much older patents that were put in place.  Those were faults sometime ago.  That's no longer a common practice within the Patent and Trademark Office and I think that they realize sometime ago and what was happening there and they didn't, I don't know if you can comment more on that Tom what the trend is but I know that my personal experience is that that is no longer a common practice there.

Okay my other question is, how well developed the idea should be?  I usually have done already a lot of experiments for the observation you have or could you just report it or disclose it before its fully developed?

You mean at what stage should you disclose?  My general answer to that is as soon you've identified you had a real invention I will disclose it.  OTC may not wanna file a patent on it today but they may tell you okay this looks really good, get us some in vivo data.  Show us some more proof of concept and then we know that we can act and we really have something here.  So in general, I don't ever wanna suggest that you delay disclosing 'cause that is not really what we're after here.  We want you to disclose as soon as you've identified that you have a real invention or something that you feel as a noble invention.  Yes!

I have a question.  Is the post stocks considered an inventor and how does it benefit from that and the second question is if there is an invention that you do not acknowledge, are you able to write the letter saying you do not wanna deal anything with this invention?

I will answer the first question.  Maybe Tom.

Repeat the question.

Let me repeat the question.  You're asking first of all, post stocks that maybe inventors or personal, or their even inventors, I think that's your question and my answer to that is if you contributed to the conception and the invention, then you are an inventor.  If you are, it doesn't matter what your ranking is.  Inventorship is a matter of law, like I was saying, and it's just as simple at that.  Now how will you benefit?  Well that again comes down to percent contribution that's defined and for what I understand as the post stocks, you're probably working directly with your mentor and your faculty adviser and here she may also be an inventor on there.  I would imagine you likely are and again that's really, all of that's decided among the inventors.  And again if you created anything towards the conception of that invention and you are an inventor.  Now, how they deal with it, if you're saying M. D. Anderson chooses not to pursue commercialization or file a patent, I don't know what the standard practices now about that.  But typically, I don't think M. D. Anderson, I mean, is going to just give it up.  I mean, if you really feel you have a reason for why it needs to be commercialized and you feel they haven't moved on it, get in touch with them, talk to them further.  Find out why.  Maybe they're lacking a piece of information that just hasn't been communicated or maybe you feel you communicated it and I missed it.  All of these things are important and you have to... constant communication that's what Keith was talking about and I just emphasized it again and go from there.