Comment to the SEC in Support of the Enhanced Disclosure of Patent and Technology License Information

Intangible assets like IP constitute a large share of the value of firms, and the US economy generally. Accurate information on the intellectual property (IP) holdings and transactions of publicly-traded firms facilitates price discovery in the market and reduces transaction costs. While public understanding of the innovation economy has been expanded by a large stream of empirical research using patent data, and more recently trademark information this research is only as good as the accuracy and completeness of the data it builds upon. In contrast with information about patents and trademarks, good information about IP licensing is much less publicly available. Although IP royalties provide large in-bound trade flows to the United States, remarkably little is known about the economic realities of IP transactions. But not only are licensing royalties economically impactful, but building a better understanding of how markets for technology operate in a modern, innovation economy is important for the transparency of markets, and to the public and policy-makers. Open data on innovation is currently siloed, fragmented, and unfedeRrarated across a number of repositories (some electronic and others physical) including the Administrative Office of the Courts, Secretary of State Offices, Copyright Office, IRS, USPTO, SEC, FDA, NSF, SBA and others, raising search and discovery costs and undermining the goals of open data. Data on “comparables” tend to be thin in the industry, a situation that may offer a sub-optimal market environment for startup firms: these young entities often rely on selling intangibles, but have low bargaining power, and limited resources to invest in search and price discovery. Disclosures of material licenses and intellectual property information to the SEC addresses a number of existing gaps, with the potential to play an expanded role. In fact, IP license information is not widely available to the public through any other federal agency, even in cases where the IP was federally funded. Thus the IP license information available through the SEC is an invaluable resource to the public. One major limitation with the existing SEC licensing information, however, is that it is often difficult to find and manipulate. An impediment arises since the data are not tagged or designed to be easily combined with other information sources. One of us, for example, has sought to determine which firms have SEC-registered patent licenses over a period of time for the purpose of establishing a public database of licenses obtained through FOIA requests. However, there is no straightforward way for the public to search for this information, in the SEC record or otherwise. The overall thrust of our comments is to commend the SEC on the valuable disclosures its requirements encourage and to recommend preserving and augmenting, rather than diminishing them, in order to 1) produce more useful data and 2) reduce the costs of discovering and using existing data disclosed to the SEC. In many cases, an SEC requirement will not require reporting entities to create new information (e.g., when disclosing patents or licenses) but it will greatly reduce the costs to third parties of searching for this information

Comment to the SEC in Support of the Enhanced Disclosure of Patent and Technology License Information

Intangible assets like IP constitute a large share of the value of firms, and the US economy generally. Accurate information on the intellectual property (IP) holdings and transactions of publicly-traded firms facilitates price discovery in the market and reduces transaction costs. While public understanding of the innovation economy has been expanded by a large stream of empirical research using patent data, and more recently trademark information this research is only as good as the accuracy and completeness of the data it builds upon. In contrast with information about patents and trademarks, good information about IP licensing is much less publicly available. Although IP royalties provide large in-bound trade flows to the United States, remarkably little is known about the economic realities of IP transactions. But not only are licensing royalties economically impactful, but building a better understanding of how markets for technology operate in a modern, innovation economy is important for the transparency of markets, and to the public and policy-makers. Open data on innovation is currently siloed, fragmented, and unfedeRrarated across a number of repositories (some electronic and others physical) including the Administrative Office of the Courts, Secretary of State Offices, Copyright Office, IRS, USPTO, SEC, FDA, NSF, SBA and others, raising search and discovery costs and undermining the goals of open data. Data on “comparables” tend to be thin in the industry, a situation that may offer a sub-optimal market environment for startup firms: these young entities often rely on selling intangibles, but have low bargaining power, and limited resources to invest in search and price discovery. Disclosures of material licenses and intellectual property information to the SEC addresses a number of existing gaps, with the potential to play an expanded role. In fact, IP license information is not widely available to the public through any other federal agency, even in cases where the IP was federally funded. Thus the IP license information available through the SEC is an invaluable resource to the public. One major limitation with the existing SEC licensing information, however, is that it is often difficult to find and manipulate. An impediment arises since the data are not tagged or designed to be easily combined with other information sources. One of us, for example, has sought to determine which firms have SEC-registered patent licenses over a period of time for the purpose of establishing a public database of licenses obtained through FOIA requests. However, there is no straightforward way for the public to search for this information, in the SEC record or otherwise. The overall thrust of our comments is to commend the SEC on the valuable disclosures its requirements encourage and to recommend preserving and augmenting, rather than diminishing them, in order to 1) produce more useful data and 2) reduce the costs of discovering and using existing data disclosed to the SEC. In many cases, an SEC requirement will not require reporting entities to create new information (e.g., when disclosing patents or licenses) but it will greatly reduce the costs to third parties of searching for this information

Post-Grant Adjudication of Drug Patents: Agency and/or Court?

The America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) created a robust administrative system-the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)-that provides a route for challenging the validity of granted patents outside of district courts. Congress determined that administrative adjudication of the validity of initial patent grants could be cheaper and more scientifically accurate than district court adjudication of such validity. For private economic value per patent, few areas of technology can match the biopharmaceutical industry. This is particularly true for small-molecule drugs. A billion-dollar drug monopoly may be protected from competition by a relatively small number of patents. Accordingly, the social cost of invalid patents-and, by extension, the potential benefit of PTAB review-is particularly acute for small molecule drugs. Conversely, if the PTAB is overly assertive and improperly targets high-quality patents, we may observe problematic reductions in innovation incentives. Thus, empirical research on how PTAB review is functioning in the area of drug patents is important. To investigate PTAB review of drug patents empirically, this Article uses several novel datasets, which are made publicly available, to study the respective roles of the PTAB and the district courts. Our empirical findings indicate that the PTAB\u27s role in adjudicating small molecule patents has been substantially more modest than for other types of patents. Moreover, there is little evidence that the PTAB targets categories of small-molecule patents that are generally considered high quality. There is also no evidence that the PTAB targets small-molecule patents held by small entities. However, PTAB challenges may not differentiate as finely among different categories of patents as district court challenges. The Article concludes by discussing legal reforms policymakers could implement if they were interested in encouraging a more active role for the PTAB in policing the validity of small-molecule drug patents. The case for these reforms is bolstered by data showing that the PTAB is used more frequently for biologics patents, where litigation currently operates differently than for small molecule drugs. The Article also discusses how ex post determination of drug patent validity at the PTAB could be structured in comparison to more rigorous ex ante patent application examination

Post-Grant Adjudication of Drug Patents: Agency and/or Court?

The America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) created a robust administrative system—the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)—that provides a route for challenging the validity of granted patents outside of district courts. Congress determined that administrative adjudication of the validity of initial patent grants could be cheaper and more scientifically accurate than district court adjudication of such validity. For private economic value per patent, few areas of technology can match the biopharmaceutical industry. This is particularly true for small-molecule drugs. A billion-dollar drug monopoly may be protected from competition by a relatively small number of patents. Accordingly, the social cost of invalid patents—and, by extension, the potential benefit of PTAB review—is particularly acute for small molecule drugs. Conversely, if the PTAB is overly assertive and improperly targets high-quality patents, we may observe problematic reductions in innovation incentives. Thus, empirical research on how PTAB review is functioning in the area of drug patents is important. To investigate PTAB review of drug patents empirically, this Article uses several novel datasets, which are made publicly available, to study the respective roles of the PTAB and the district courts. Our empirical findings indicate that the PTAB’s role in adjudicating small-molecule patents has been substantially more modest than for other types of patents. Moreover, there is little evidence that the PTAB targets categories of small-molecule patents hat are generally considered high quality. There is also no evidence that the PTAB targets small-molecule patents held by small entities. However, PTAB challenges may not differentiate as finely among different categories of patents as district court challenges. The Article concludes by discussing legal reforms policymakers could implement if they were interested in encouraging a more active role for the PTAB in policing the validity of small-molecule drug patents. The case for these reforms is bolstered by data showing that the PTAB is used more frequently for biologics patents, where litigation currently operates differently than for small molecule drugs. The Article also discusses how ex post determination of drug patent validity at the PTAB could be structured in comparison to more rigorous ex ante patent application examination

Hemolytic anemia in a case of SARS CoV2 infection without respiratory involvement: a new dimension of COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2) infection is a predominantly respiratory illness with variable organ involvement. Hematological changes are an important manifestation and anemia is usually autoimmune in origin. It is easily identifiable and treatable complication. In absence of tell tail sign of COVID-19 infection high index of suspicion is required with prompt testing. Our patient presented as case of autoimmune hemolytic anemia with no evidence of COVID-19 infection and tested after ruling out common causes in Indian setting. He responded to steroid therapy and viral clearance

Quick Separation in Chordal and Split Graphs

In this paper we study two classical cut problems, namely Multicut and Multiway Cut on chordal graphs and split graphs. In the Multicut problem, the input is a graph G, a collection of vertex pairs (si, ti), i ∈ [], and a positive integer k and the goal is to decide if there exists a vertex subset S ⊆ V (G) \ {si, ti : i ∈ []} of size at most k such that for every vertex pair (si, ti), si and ti are in two different connected components of G − S. In Unrestricted Multicut, the solution S can possibly pick the vertices in the vertex pairs {(si, ti) : i ∈ []}. An important special case of the Multicut problem is the Multiway Cut problem, where instead of vertex pairs, we are given a set T of terminal vertices, and the goal is to separate every pair of distinct vertices in T × T. The fixed parameter tractability (FPT) of these problems was a long-standing open problem and has been resolved fairly recently. Multicut and Multiway Cut now admit algorithms with running times 2O(k3)nO(1) and 2knO(1), respectively. However, the kernelization complexity of both these problemsis not fully resolved: while Multicut cannot admit a polynomial kernel under reasonable complexity assumptions, it is a well known open problem to construct a polynomial kernel for Multiway Cut. Towards designing faster FPT algorithms and polynomial kernels for the above mentioned problems, we study them on chordal and split graphs. In particular we obtain the following results. 1. Multicut on chordal graphs admits a polynomial kernel with O(k37) vertices. Multiway Cuton chordal graphs admits a polynomial kernel with O(k13) vertices. 2. Multicut on chordal graphs can be solved in time min{O(2k·(k3 + )·(n + m)), 2O( log k)·(n +m) + (n + m)}. Hence Multicut on chordal graphs parameterized by the number of terminals is in XP. 3. Multicut on split graphs can be solved in time min{O(1.2738k+kn+(n+m), O(2··(n+m))}. Unrestricted Multicut on split graphs can be solved in time O(4· · (n + m)).publishedVersio

Parameterized Approximation Scheme for Feedback Vertex Set

Feedback Vertex Set (FVS) is one of the most studied vertex deletion problems in the field of graph algorithms. In the decision version of the problem, given a graph G and an integer k, the question is whether there exists a set S of at most k vertices in G such that G-S is acyclic. It is one of the first few problems which were shown to be NP-complete, and has been extensively studied from the viewpoint of approximation and parameterized algorithms. The best-known polynomial time approximation algorithm for FVS is a 2-factor approximation, while the best known deterministic and randomized FPT algorithms run in time ?^*(3.460^k) and ?^*(2.7^k) respectively. In this paper, we contribute to the newly established area of parameterized approximation, by studying FVS in this paradigm. In particular, we combine the approaches of parameterized and approximation algorithms for the study of FVS, and achieve an approximation guarantee with a factor better than 2 in randomized FPT running time, that improves over the best known parameterized algorithm for FVS. We give three simple randomized (1+?) approximation algorithms for FVS, running in times ?^*(2^{?k}? 2.7^{(1-?)k}), ?^*(({(4/(1+?))^{(1+?)}}?{(?/3)^?})^k), and ?^*(4^{(1-?)k}) respectively for every ? ? (0,1). Combining these three algorithms, we obtain a factor (1+?) approximation algorithm for FVS, which has better running time than the best-known (randomized) FPT algorithm for every ? ? (0, 1). This is the first attempt to look at a parameterized approximation of FVS to the best of our knowledge. Our algorithms are very simple, and they rely on some well-known reduction rules used for arriving at FPT algorithms for FVS

Interference of anti-nuclear antibodies on determination of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies in patients suspected of vasculitis: a case series

Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA) are mainly associated with medium and small vessel vasculitis. Two main methodologies currently available for detection of these antibodies are indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and monospecific proteinase 3 (PR3) and myeloperoxidase (MPO) based immunoassays. However, well-defined guidelines regarding mode of testing for ANCA in laboratories still don’t exist, leading to problems in diagnosis and further patient management. Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies testing by IIF and enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) often pose a significant challenge in diseases other than vasculitis and in overlapping autoimmune conditions. Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies reporting by IIF can be challenging in certain circumstances. This case series aims to discuss four cases with probable interference of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) during ANCA testing by IIF resulting in ANCA false positivity. All four cases on subsequent reflex testing by line immunoassay (LIA) for PR3, MPO and glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antigens proved otherwise. While analysing for the presence of ANCA by IIF, the possible interference of ANA leading to a false positive ANCA result should be kept in mind and alternative methods of testing like ELISA, extended granulocyte based IIF assays with MPO and PR3 coated beads, etc., should also be advised. Probability of atypical ANCA in diseases other than vasculitis should also be considered in case of ambiguous results

Nano Medicine in Healing Chronic Wounds: Opportunities and Challenges

Chronic wounds pose a continual healthcare challenge, demanding innovative interventions to improve healing outcomes. This comprehensive review navigates the transformative landscape of nanotechnology in chronic wound healing, covering mechanisms, clinical applications, challenges, and future directions. The introduction establishes the need for advanced therapeutic strategies, providing an overview of chronic wounds and the evolving landscape of therapeutic approaches. The exploration of nanoparticle types and their mechanisms in wound healing encompasses lipid-based, polymeric, and inorganic variants, each contributing uniquely to drug solubility, controlled release, and tailored interactions within the wound microenvironment. Clinical applications and formulations exemplify real-world efficacy, demonstrating nanotechnology\u27s success in promoting wound healing. Opportunities in nano-medicine for chronic wounds focus on targeted drug delivery precision and overcoming cellular barriers through enhanced cellular uptake. Acknowledging challenges, including biocompatibility concerns and regulatory hurdles, the review emphasizes the need for rigorous evaluation and streamlined regulatory pathways. Future directions delve into emerging nanotechnologies and potential breakthroughs, highlighting advancements in design, fabrication, and integration with artificial intelligence and personalized medicine