Autonomous Vehicle Consultant

SBIR CONSULTANT BULLETIN – Protecting Proprietary Information

I recently conducted a webinar on SBIR proposal writing for the Association of Clean Tech Incubators of New England (ACTION). An attendee posed the following question on Government treatment of proprietary information. Here is the question and my answer:

Question: “I have never been 100% clear on what, if all, of proprietary info is protected and not be disclosed to 3rd parties (potentially competitors).  I understand that the gov’t agency has provisions for the proposer to identify what is proprietary info and the agency puts forth a _limited_ effort to protect that information.  However, I believe that if a 3rd party (i.e. competitor) really wants info in the proposal or subsequent project reports, etc — the 3rd party can eventually get the info from the agency if they push hard for it.  I believe they can do this under freedom of info act.  I do not know this for certain, however.  Under such a scenario, therefore, it is important to have a provisional patent on any key info that is disclosed in docs sent to gov’t.  Is this definitely the case?”

Answer: Although Government agency violation of SBIR data rights is illegal, it may happen. I do not know of any specific cases, however. Having a patent before writing a SBIR proposal may provide protection. On the other hand, such a patent could reveal your “secret sauce.” You may proceed with a patent application during a Phase I or II program. While working at my previous company, the contracts folks asked about any possible patent disclosures related to my SBIR programs.

Having “been around the block” a few times, it strikes me that if you have a desirable innovation worth millions, do expect to have your patent violated. From a small company perspective, it would be extremely costly to defend your position against a large corporation with “deep pockets.” In essence, these are the risks one assumes in the innovation space. Here is a link to the SBIR rules on data rights.

SBIR CONSULTANT BULLETIN – See National Science Foundation SBIR Proposal Bidding Topic, WT2, Systems and Devices for Potential Bidding Opportunities

To: National Science Foundation (NSF) Proposal Bidders

From: J. H. Everson Consulting

Date: 7/22/16

Subject: NSF Interest – Internet of Things (IoT)

Reference: Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program

According to McKinsey & Company on the Internet of Things, “Sensors and actuators connected by networks to computing systems—has received enormous attention over the past five years…we analyzed more than 150 use cases, ranging from people whose devices monitor health and wellness to manufacturers that utilize sensors to optimize the maintenance of equipment and protect the safety of workers. Our bottom-up analysis for the applications, we size estimates that the IoT has a total potential economic impact of $3.9 trillion to $11.1 trillion a year by 2025.”

The number and variety of previous NSF SBIR awards regarding the Internet of Things (IoT) provides a strong indication of future NSF proposal bidding opportunities in this space (Please see partial list below of previous NSF awards granted during the past 18 months). The next NSF SBIR solicitation will be published sometime during August with proposal acceptance starting in November and closing in December 2016. Given the recent history of NSF IoT awards, it will be worthwhile to check this pending NSF solicitation.

Recent NSF SBIR AWARDS on IoT

• STTR Phase II: Advanced Hybrid Piezoelectric Energy Harvester

• SBIR Phase I: Polar Transmitter for Ultra High Frequency Radio Identification Readers

• SBIR Phase I: Smart Chip-System Miniaturization for Internet of Things

• SBIR Phase I: Low-cost, wireless, energy harvesting environmental sensors

• SBIR Phase I: Automated Pairing and Provisioning

• SBIR Phase II: Prospect: A Hardware Security Verification Tool

• SBIR Phase I: Lithographic Patterning of Multiple Porous Crystalline Thin Films on Working Silicon Devices for Gas Sensing Applications

• SBIR Phase I: Ultra-Wideband Wireless Optical Transceiver

• SBIR Phase I: Monolithic CMOS-Integration of Electroplated Copper MEMS Inertial Sensors

Please contact me for proposal assistance on the SBIR program:

Email: jeff@jheversonconsulting.com

Website: www.jheversonconsulting.com

SBIR CONSULTANT NOTE: MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GERMAN AND US SUPPORT OF RENEWABLE ENERGY

SBIR Consultant – Market Analysis: There are many issues of importance to be stressed in writing a competitive SBIR proposal. One of these is market analysis: urgent need for your innovation, your competition, showstopper issues, cost, and policy/legal impediments. The blog below is an example of a snapshot market analysis where the US renewable energy maket has considerable room to grow. Perhaps more Government support is needed to offset fossil fuel influence on Congress to level the playing field for renewable technologies. Does your innovation face this type of problem?

In 2013 the U.S energy production from renewable sources was 13.1 percent of the total energy generation. In contrast German renewable energy production was 25.8 percent in 2014.

The following graph is a plot of U.S. renewable energy production (See p. 27) starting in 2001 through 2013. The vertical axis is the fraction of renewable energy production for a given year, where years are delineated along the horizontal axis. U.S. renewable energy sources include biomass, geothermal, solar, wind and hydropower. Germany has a similar set of renewable energy categories.

Suppose one assumes U.S. progress towards greater levels of renewable energy production will continue at the same rate that prevailed from 2001 to 2013. Then by extrapolating this straight-line plot, U.S. renewable energy production in 2046 will be equal to what Germany has now! 

SBIR CONSULTANT NOTE: IMPORTANCE OF MARKET ANALYSIS FOR ENTRENCHED COMPETITION

SBIR Consultant – Market Analysis: There are many issues of importance to be stressed in writing a competitive SBIR proposal. One of these is market analysis: urgent need for your innovation, your competition, showstopper issues, cost, and policy/legal impediments. The blog below is an example of a snapshot market analysis where oil-fired power plants still hold an entrenched position in Massachusetts and will probably not give way any time soon for large-scale solar or wind technologies as replacement power sources. Does your innovation face this type of problem?

Massachusetts oil-fired power plants are still emitting mercury that is a serious health hazard. Here is the story that the general public probably does not know about inadequate emission regulations.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Burning oil at power plants produces nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, methane, and mercury compounds. The amount of sulfur dioxide and mercury compounds can vary greatly depending on the sulfur and mercury content of the oil that is burned.”

The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)* noted, “Exposure to mercury, even in small amounts, is a great danger to humans and wildlife. When mercury enters the body it acts as a neurotoxin, which means it harms our brain and nervous system. Mercury exposure is especially dangerous to pregnant women and young children, but all adults are at risk for serious medical problems.”

As of December 2011, the EPA announced mercury emissions standards for power plants with a capacity of 25MW or greater.

Massachusetts has 23 oil-fired power plants  where 16 of them have a capacity less than 25MW (i.e., 70 percent of them are not subject to the EPA rule on mercury emissions)!

* National Resources Defense Council, April 2012

SBIR CONSULTANT NOTE ON CLIMATE CHANGE

There is a ‘slight’ difference of opinion about climate change in the U.S. Whom do you believe? Congress or the U.S. military? Look to the US military for SBIR bidding opportunities.

Climate Change Deniers in Congress: “The Center for American Progress Action Fund found that there are 182 climate deniers in the current Congress: 144 in the House and 38 in the Senate. That means more than six in 10 Americans are represented by people who think that climate change is a big ‘ol’ liberal hoax — including some leaders at the highest levels of government, like Senate Majority Leader Mitch ‘I Am Not a Climate Scientist’ McConnell…”

Total dirty energy contributions received by climate change deniers in Congress amounted to more than $73M as stated in the above referenced source. Clearly, the fossil fuel industry owns Congress.

U.S. Military Preparing for Climate Change: “According to Department of Defense (DOD) Directive (4715.21), the DOD will be facilitating federal, state, local, tribal, private sector, and nonprofit sector efforts to improve climate preparedness and resilience, and to implement the 2014 DoD Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap.”

“Among the future trends that will impact our national security is climate change,” said Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel. Rising global temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, climbing sea levels, and more extreme weather events will intensify the challenges of global instability, hunger, poverty, and conflict. By taking a proactive, flexible approach to assessment, analysis, and adaptation, the Defense Department will keep pace with a changing climate, minimize its impacts on our missions, and continue to protect our national security.”