1 workshop on good practices dedicated to the … global technologies inc. États-unis d’amérique...

Isabelle RIVATDirection de la Valorisation

31 MAI 2016

| PAGE 1

CEA | 10 AVRIL 2012

Juin 2014

Direction de la Valorisation

1St workshop on Good Practices

dedicated to the "Management of Patent

Portfolio"

31 MAI 2016

| PAGE 2I Rivat - Direction de la Valorisation

Overview of CEA patenting

process

31 MAI 2016


CEA : a public research organization

For nearly 70 years, the CEA led, on behalf of the State, research programs, to increase scientific knowledge and contribute to innovation and technology transfer in a limited number of areas.

Budget 2014 : 4.66 billion euros including 2.93 billion euros civil budget

Staff : 15,828 full-time employees, including 11,442 full-time employees for civil activities

Etablissement Public de recherche à caractère industriel et commercial (EPIC) governed by the “le code de la recherche”

“Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives” since march 9th 2010

31 MAI 2016

| PAGE 4I Rivat - Dir VALO

information technology, health technology

national defense and global security

low-carbon energy (nuclear and renewable)

Education Dissemination of

knowledge

supporting role to the industry : Tech transfert

excellence in fundamental researchcoordinates and participates in research on very large research infrastructures.

CEA : FIELD OF INTEREST

31 MAI 2016


CEA, TERRITORIAL LOCATION IN 9 REGIONS

| PAGE 5

10 research centers in France4 "CEA Tech regional technological transfer platform s"

| PAGE 5

*

Micro-NanotechnologiesNanobiotechnologyNew energy technologiesRhône-Alpes

Cesta

Grenoble

Marcoule

Valduc

Bruyères-le-Châtel

Saclay

Fontenay-aux-Roses

Gramat

Cadarache

MaterialCentre, Bourgogne

Vulnerability assessmentDetonicsMidi-Pyrénées

Nuclear area: Fuel Cycle and Waste Management Vallée du Rhône

Nuclear Fusion, FissionBioénergiesProvence-Alpes-Côte-d’Azur

Material sciences, software technology, supercomputing, BiomedicalIle-de-France

Lasers and plasmasAquitaine

Le Ripault

Antennes régionales CEA Tech

*

*

*

*Nantes

Metz

Bordeaux

Toulouse

31 MAI 2016


Corporate governance (as at 31st December 2013)

/Organization chart

* DefenceSector (DAM)

* NuclearSector (DEN)

* TechnologicalResearch

Sector (DRT)

* PhysicalSciences

Sector (DSM)

* Life Sciences

Sector (DSV)

HumanResources andTraining Sector

Strategyand External

Relations Sector

Management and Informationsystem Sector

Riskmanagement

Sector

Global SecurityandNon-

proliferationprogramme

New Technologies

for Energyprogramme

Advancedmaterials

programme

HealthTechnologiesprogramme

Nanosciencesprogramme

Toxicologyprogramme

Cross-cutting programmes

OPERATIONAL SECTORS FUNCTIONAL SECTORS

High Commissioner

for Atomic Energy

Yves Bréchet

ChairmanBernard Bigot

Deputy-Chairman

Hervé Bernard

31 MAI 2016


Directorate of Valorisation

EconomicDevelopment

Strategic Intelligence

Patent process - Contracting partnerships process

Business creation

3 lines of action :

31 MAI 2016


CEA Technology transfer organization

ValoDRT

Génération et exploitation de

la PI

Intelligence stratégique

Création d’entreprises

DEN DSM DSV

ValoDEN

ValoDSM

ValoDSV

ValoDAM

Contrat/PIDEN

Contrat/PIDSM

Contrat/PIDSV

Contrat/PIDAM

DJC – Legal affairs Directorate - legal support

DRT

Service Bibliométrie Etudes Marketing (SBEM)

SAPriGre / IdF

Cellule essaimage et création d’entreprises (Business creation dedicated structure)

Operational Directorates

General Directorate of CEA

Direction de la valorisation

DAM

Pulse - Coordination - Reporting TT activities for all the CEA

1 – Patent portfolio strategy

31 MAI 2016


Why is it usefull to develop a strong PI strategy in CEA?

IP policy is part of the strategic elements as regards the development of the organization. Indeed, it helps to:

- enhance CEA attractiveness to industrial partners by providing innovative and secured research. With no IP rights, the industry will rarely find an interest in investing in a technology : if patents are

not filed, some results may not be well exploited.

- increase national and international visibility of the organization.Due to the globalization of research, any research structure can become an industrial partner,

regardless of geographic location. It is therefore essential to make it visible at international level in

particular through indicators that are understandable and internationally recognized. In this context,

patents are an essential indicator showing the ability of an organization to develop innovative

research, which is also secure and transferable to industry.

- bring together CEA actors around a common goal in terms of technology transfert : eg filing patents

31 MAI 2016


Technology transfer model

Patent filing

World classresearch

Expertise Know HowKnowledge

PartnershipsCollaborations

Licensing

Creationof companies

Researchers

Inventors

Patent Portfolio Managers

Managers

Support team

1 - PROTECTION Creation of IPR

(Intellectual Property Rights - IPR )

2 – TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

Know-how, knowledge, IPR

Value creation

31 MAI 2016


754 patents filed in 2013CEA : 1st public research organization to

file patents (INPI 2013)3rd national applicant in the INPI ranking

2013.

1 - PROTECTION Creation of IPR

(Intellectual Property Rights - IPR)

2 – TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

Know-how, knowledge, IPR

11 start-up creations in 2013 (∑ 169 start-ups since 1972, over

100 start-ups since 2000)

2013 :61 MK studies

+ 2000 contrats in force with industrial and academic partners

generating over 906 M€ (2013)

Royalties ≈19,3 M€ (2013)

CEA : 754 PATENTS FILED IN 2013 ( FIRST FILINGS)

31 MAI 2016

| PAGE 13

1st applicant as regards French public research organizations

3rd national applicant INPI ranking 2013…

I Rivat - Direction de la Valorisation

Rang 2013 Nom du déposantDemandes

Publiées1 PSA Peugeot Citroën 13782 Groupe Safran 6453 CEA 6254 Groupe Renault 5435 Groupe Valéo 4946 Groupe L'Oréal SA 4537 CNRS* 4088 Airbus Groupe 3729 Robert Bosch Gmbh* 34710 Thalès 28411 Groupe Orange 24512 Groupe STMicroélectronics 22113 IFP Energies Nouvelles 18814 Michelin 17315 Air Liquide 16316 Schneider Electric 16017 Groupe Saint Gobain 14318 Goupe SEB 11819 Alstom 10520 Groupe Total 10121 Groupe Arkema 9622 Continental AG 8123 Solvay 7624 General Electric Company* 6425 SOITEC* 6426 Groupe AREVA 5327 Oberthur Technologies 5228 Treves 5129 Groupe Sidel 4830 Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1er 4731 EDF Groupe 4632 Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation* 4533 Groupe Somfy 4334 Décathlon (Oxylane) 3935 Sagemcom SAS 3836 Alcatel Lucent 3537 Groupe Nexter 3538 Salomon SAS 3539 Aptar France SAS 3440 CNES 3441 DCNS* 3442 Aktiebolaget SKF* 3343 Groupe Bouygues 3144 NTN-SNR 3145 CGG Services SA* 3046 FagorBrandt SAS 3047 Essilor international 1948 Legrand 2849 Technicolor 2850 Bull SAS 2731 MAI 2016 | PAGE 14Direction de la Valorisation31 MAI 2016 | PAGE 14Direction de la Valorisation31 MAI 2016 | PAGE 14JC Guibert - Dir VALO

3rd place INPI Ranking

2013 – 625 filings(2012 : 2ème 566 dépôts 2011 : 3ème 545 dépôts)

Rang

2013Nom du déposant Pays d'origine 2 013

∆ 2013-2012

(valeur)

1. PANASONIC CORPORATION Japon 2881 -109

2. ZTE CORPORATION Chine 2309 -1597

3. HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. Chine 2094 293

4. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED États-Unis d’Amérique 2036 731

5. INTEL CORPORATION États-Unis d’Amérique 1852 1212

6. SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japon 1840 -161

7. ROBERT BOSCH CORPORATION Allemagne 1786 11

8. TOYOTA JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japon 1696 43

9. TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) Suède 1467 268

10. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. Pays-Bas 1423 193

11. SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT Allemagne 1323 51

12. MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION Japon 1312 269

13. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. République de Corée 1193 460

14. NEC CORPORATION Japon 1190 191

15. LG ELECTRONICS INC. République de Corée 1170 76

16. FUJIFILM CORPORATION Japon 1008 117

17. SHENZHEN CHINA STAR OPTOELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD Chine 916 712

18. SONY CORPORATION Japon 915 337

19. HITACHI, LTD. Japon 841 96

20. NOKIA CORPORATION Finlande 807 137

21. MICROSOFT CORPORATION États-Unis d’Amérique 806 171

22. HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. États-Unis d’Amérique 782 162

23. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION États-Unis d’Amérique 690 160

24. BASF SE Allemagne 685 41

25. NISSAN MOTOR CO., LTD. Japon 644 336

26. FUJITSU LIMITED Japon 636 -35

27. GOOGLE, INC. États-Unis d’Amérique 628 207

28. 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY États-Unis d’Amérique 605 1

29. APPLE COMPUTER, INC. États-Unis d’Amérique 581 192

30. CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA Japon 531 51

31. MURATA MANUFACTURING CO., LTD. Japon 513 51

32. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY États-Unis d’Amérique 512 192

33. MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES LTD. Japon 450 -116

34. LG CHEM, LTD. République de Corée 449 97

34. HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC. États-Unis d’Amérique 449 165

36. KABUSHIKI KAISHA TOSHIBA Japon 443 46

37. NOKIA SIEMENS NETWORKS OY Finlande 426 99

38. KYOCERA CORPORATION Japon 424 71

39. COMMISSARIAT A L'ENERGIE ATOMIQUE ET AUXENERGIES ALTERNATIVES France 419 28

40. DOW GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. États-Unis d’Amérique 402 85

41. E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY États-Unis d’Amérique 398 -59

41. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA États-Unis d’Amérique 398 46

43. SANYO ELECTRIC CO., LTD. Japon 395 -142

44. PIONEER CORPORATION Japon 383 170

45. BAKER HUGHES INCORPORATED États-Unis d’Amérique 380 -17

46. SUMITOMO CHEMICAL COMPANY, LIMITED Japon 376 -182

47. PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY États-Unis d’Amérique 374 -39

48. TENCENT TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) COMPANY LIMITED Chine 365 243

49. HONDA MOTOR CO., LTD. Japon 362 21

50. NITTO DENKO CORPORATION Japon 361 55

50 ALCATEL LUCENT France 361 15

39th place PCT Ranking (WIPO)

2013 – 419 filings(2012 : 38ème 391 dépôts, 2011 : 36ème 371 dépôts,2010 : 36ème 308 dépôts, 2009 : 63ème 238 dépôts)

Rank CompanyOrigin of the

applicant20133 2012 2013/2012 Rank 2012 Change

1. SAMSUNG KR 2833 2289 24% 1 =

2. SIEMENS EP 1974 2193 -10% 2 =

3. PHILIPS EP 1839 1160 59% 12 + 9

4. LG KR 1648 1635 1% 5 + 1

5. BASF EP 1577 1713 -8% 3 - 2

6. ROBERT BOSCH EP 1574 1456 8% 6 =

7. MIT SUBISHI JP 1327 1344 -1% 8 + 1

8. GENERAL ELECTRIC US 1257 1702 -26% 4 - 4

9. QUALCOMM US 1204 1381 -13% 7 - 2

10. ERICSSON EP 1184 1189 0% 9 - 1

11. HUAWEI CN 1077 830 30% 17 + 6

12. PANASONIC JP 1055 1169 -10% 11 - 1

13. T OYOT A MOTOR JP 894 714 25% 22 + 9

14. HIT ACHI JP 874 830 5% 17 + 3

15. SONY JP 855 1098 -22% 13 - 2

16. BAYER EP 850 884 -4% 15 - 1

17. ALCATEL LUCENT EP 806 872 -8% 16 - 1

18. EADS EP 783 818 -4% 19 + 1

19. NOKIA EP 761 502 52% 38 + 19

20. FUJITSU JP 722 664 9% 24 + 4

21. NEC JP 699 601 16% 27 + 6

22. CANON JP 682 630 8% 26 + 4

23. DSM EP 659 414 59% 44 + 21

23. JOHNSON & JOHNSON US 659 590 12% 30 + 7

25. SANOFI EP 651 577 13% 31 + 6

26. ZTE CN 616 1184 -48% 10 - 16

27. ABB EP 602 656 -8% 25 - 2

28. MICROSOFT US 599 404 48% 47 + 19

29. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE EP 594 596 0% 28 - 1

30. 3M US 569 553 3% 32 + 2

31. DOW CHEMICAL US 560 536 4% 35 + 4

32. BSH EP 559 596 -6% 28 - 4

33. COMMISSARIAT À L'ENERGIE ATOMIQUE EP 546 454 20% 41 + 8

34. BLACKBERRY CA 525 1011 -48% 14 - 20

35. T ECHNICOLOR EP 520 490 6% 40 + 5

36. HONEYWELL US 519 551 -6% 33 - 3

37. PROCT ER & GAMBLE US 516 531 -3% 36 - 1

38. UNITED TECHNOLOGIES US 507 777 -35% 20 - 18

39. BOEING US 501 407 23% 46 + 7

40. T OSHIBA JP 489 550 -11% 34 - 6

41. ALSTOM EP 464 491 -5% 39 - 2

42. UNILEVER EP 456 417 9% 43 + 1

43. NESTLE EP 435 382 14% 49 + 6

44. MERCK KGAA EP 418 351 19% 54 + 10

45. DU PONT DE NEMOURS US 400 508 -21% 37 - 8

45. FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT EP 400 344 16% 57 + 12

47. CONTINENTAL EP 392 311 26% 61 + 14

48. INT EL US 381 297 28% 63 + 15

49. NOVARTIS EP 376 436 -14% 42 - 7

50. GOOGLE US 368 265 39% 67 + 17

50. RICOH JP 368 365 1% 51 + 1

33rd place EPO ranking

2013 – 546 filings(2012 : 41ème 454 dépôts, 2011 : 41ème 403 dépôts)

Increased international visibility

Patent offices ranking

OVER 5000 PATENT FAMILIES IN FORCE - 31.12.13

31 MAI 2016


2 – International patent strategy

31 MAI 2016


Corresponding applications

Timing considerationsProtection in some instances may not be achieved until 48 to 84 months after the initial filing.⇒ evaluate in which countries patent protection would likely provide value.

Costs consideration The expenses arise from filing fees and annuity fees (to maintain the patent application or

issued patent in a particular country). � some countries may require that business be conducted in the official language of their

country ⇒ This will require translation costs for correspondences to and from the local

patent office. � most patent offices around the world require that only locally licensed practitioners

interface with the local patent office. ⇒ This will require costs and fees for retaining local counsel

Patent rights are territorial : they are only enforceable where they are granted.⇒ need to separately pursue protection of patent

rights in other countries in which we desire to have protection.

31 MAI 2016


3 options to pursue patent protection in different countries

1st option : to file a patent application directly in the patent office of each country where patent protection is desired

2nd option : to file a patent application in a regional patent office. (Europe, parts of Africa, and parts of Eurasia)⇒ offers economies of scale of examining the application within a

single authoritative agency and thereafter formalizing protection in the member countries of the regional patent office.

3rd option : to file a patent application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)(Filing a PCT patent application allows the applicant to delay, for up to 18 months after the filing the application or in

most cases, for up to 30 months after the filing of the first (priority) application, strategic decisions about which

countries to pursue patent protection in.)

Primary advantages of a PCT application include : � delay having to make a decision on where to file a patent application and defer payment of

regional or national filing and translation fees. � an international preliminary search for prior art (carried out by an International Search Authority

(ISA) => written opinion based on the search report. The opinion is a preliminary nonbinding opinion as to the patentability of the claimed invention.

� protection against translation errors occurring during the national phase (The scope of the translation of the international application may not, however, exceed the scope of the international application in its original language . - cf Asia)

2 – Patent portfolio costs

31 MAI 2016

| PAGE 20

PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: A STRATEGIC ISSUE

- selection and abandon of certain patents to reduce the costs, including old patents, which are no longer of interest, analysis of the potential for technology transfer of the family patent…

- great attention to the filling route…⇒ Issue : define methods to identify, on the basis of relevant criteria, what are the

inventions to keep or not: multi-criteria and not just financial analysis.(technical interest : technical manager, potential for technology transfer short, medium and long term : contract manager – IP costs and likelihood of obtaining a patent granted in particular countries : patent engineer)

PI cost control ensured by rigorous and regular manag ement of patent portfolios:

≈ 20 employees support researchers / inventors at all stages of the creation and management of IP and ensure the relevance of patent filings.9 patent engineers have passed the European Qualifying Examination (EEQ) which attests the high level of professionalism of these employees. Their work, close to laboratories, is a guarantee of the quality of patent filings.

I Rivat - Direction de la Valorisation

3 – Patent process

31 MAI 2016


Patent process

Inventor :Whatever its positions in the organization, the inventor is legally obliged to report any invention to his employer. He is helped by a patent engineer .

⇒ technical skills (unit), strategic skills (portfolio manager), legal and methodological competence (patent engineer), data analysis (data analysis engineer), …

Inventors are informed as regards the portfolio management but usually are not involved in the decision-making process.

Managerial involvement : Strong managerial involvement at the time of patent filing has become a necessity because a potential patentable invention does not automatically trigger the filing process.The unit of the inventor decides to file whether or not, according to its strategy and information at its disposal. Each operational sector may have its own decision-making process, (Division level, Directorate level…)

Portfolio management : Management by patent portfolios has been generalized. A portfolio is a coherent set of patents centered on a technical topic or theme application. The portfolio manager is carrying the portfolio strategy on behalf of its unit.

31 MAI 2016


CEA patent engineer : mission

Patent engineers : depend on hierarchically operational sectors and are located as close as possible to the research units.The functional organization of the patent engineers network has been assigned to the Directorate of Valorisation.

Patent engineers support inventors : - in the “maturation” of the invention- in the prior art search,- in the definition of the invention and the preparation of technical memory…

Regarding procedures : Patent engineers controle, coordinate and supervise the patent processThey are in charge of the exchanges with IP law firms and, where appropriate, with the co-owners and patent offices. They send orders (first filing, corresponding applications, abandonment, withdrawal…) to IP law firms .They actively participate in the definition of ''claims'' that define the scope of patents They participate as counsel in the infringement proceedings brought by the CEA and conducted by DJC(legal Directorate), either on offense or defense

Monitoring of patents filed by third parties (private companies or academics) ⇒ (ex Oxford cell imaging – negotiation to sign a license with ISIS – further collaboration ?)

Thank you for your attention

1 workshop on good practices dedicated to the … global technologies inc. États-unis d’amérique...

Documents