Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1986 [PAGE 311]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

300

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[June 20

University Patents, Inc. ( U P I ) has decided to discontinue its efforts to patent this invention. The patent attorney prosecuting the United States patent application covering this invention advises that experiments conducted by the inventors subsequent to the filing did not duplicate the claimed catalyst. The data expected to substantiate the claims of the application do not appear to be forthcoming. The University Patent Committee has reviewed these findings and recommends that the University abandon this patent application. It further recommends that the University release its rights in this invention to the inventors, subject to the retention of shop rights in the invention by the University. 2. Novel Dosage Form of Silver Sulphadiazine in a Pharmaceutical Base Utilizing Pluronic Polyol F-127 — Frederick P. Siegel, professor, and William M. Rolling, former graduate student, Department of Pharmaceutics, Chicago. U P I reported that it does not elect to subject this invention to its servicing agreement with the University. It was determined that the compound, in its present configuration, could not be used in a clinical setting. Consequently, there appear to be no practical applications for it. U P I found that these circumstances do not justify a patenting effort. The University Patent Committee accepts these findings and recommends that the University release its rights in this invention to the inventors, subject to the retention of shop rights in the invention by the University. 3. An Inexpensive Apparatus for the Preparation of Multiple, Continuous, and Discontinuous Gradients — Stephen L. Barclay, former assistant professor, and James A. Radosevich, former graduate student, Department of Biological Sciences, Chicago; developed with support of the National Institutes of Health. U P I reported that it does not elect to subject this invention to its servicing agreement with the University. The level of commercial interest expressed in this technology was determined to be insufficient to support an effort to patent the invention. The University Patent Committee accepts this finding and recommends that the University release its rights in this invention to the sponsor of the work leading to the development of the invention, the National Institutes of Health. 4. Infant Restraint for CT Scanners — Ruben Stortzum, instrument maker, Glen D. Dobben, professor, Robert J. Kriz, assistant professor, and Charles F. James, former assistant, Department of Radiology, Chicago. U P I reported that it does not elect to subject this invention to its servicing agreement with the University. In its opinion, patent protection is not available for this invention. T h e University Patent Committee accepts this finding and recommends that the University release its rights in this invention to the inventors, subject to the retention of shop rights in the invention by the University. 5. Condensation Process in Steam Desulphurization — Shao L. Soo, professor of mechanical engineering, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Urbana; developed with support of the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources. U P I reported that it does not elect to subject this invention to its servicing agreement with the University. Its determination is that the invention is not likely to be patentable. The University Patent Committee accepts this finding and recommends that the University release its rights in this invention to the inventor, subject to the retention of shop rights in the invention by the University. 6. A Digital Electronic Counter with Analog Voltage Output — Fred Delcomyn, associate professor, Mark N. Edelman, student technical assistant, and Donald L. Fulton, electronics engineering assistant, Department of Entomology, Urbana. U P I reported that it does not elect to subject this invention to its servicing agreement with the University. Its determination is that the invention is not likely to be patentable. The University Patent Committee accepts this finding and recom-