Ann: Anteo Files its Battery Patent in Key Lithium-ion Markets, page-199

Polaris are tight on info they state in their mission strict IP security - so No.

What? Before the patents are made, there is indeed serious risk. But that can be controlled with strict security as needed. Remember customisation may occur in a variety of cases and may bring with it need for a new patent.

After that, less so, it's more about commercial in confidence.


Are you saying that no collaborations will occur unless we shareholders are aware of all moves even at the early stages?
No to that idea.

Of course it's my opinion but how are we going to progress without collaboration?
Wait until all possible patents are completely done on our own? What is Polaris' role if it's not a dealmaker as well as a development house.

Just for a sense of proportion on the amount of patents and patent applications that can apply to a new platform technology :

I hold MSB and ...

Our intellectual property portfolio encompasses approximately 800 patents or patent applications across 69 patent families, which we believe provides substantial competitive advantages for the commercial development of our cell-based therapies in major markets including the United States, Europe, Japan and China.

http://www.mesoblast.com/science/intellectual-property

Now MSB has developed most of those patents alone. But that's not necessarily possible when you just have a small team and very limited financial resources.

Further, MSB have a manufacturing partner.

Mesoblast has an alliance with the Lonza Group for long-term commercial manufacturing requirements of its product candidates

More interesting is what they say about partnerships:

We will continue to evaluate and, where appropriate, enter into additional collaborations to further advance our product candidate portfolio and to gain access to scientific expertise or funding support.

http://www.mesoblast.com/partnerships/overview

This is significant because it shows the sheer volume of IP with platform technologies, and the importance of collaborations possibly also in IP development.

If for instance, a demonstration was done using applications on existing patents, it may be possible to enter into a collaboration that means new IP (patents) are developed as part of the process of customisation for a particular purpose. The agreement would identify ADO as holder of the new IP or joint ownership/exclusivity may come into play as we haven't got a colossal amount of cash.

The platform patent helps protects the rest...then you get families of patents. it can't happen without that first one as a building block. But more patents to follow under the tight control of Polaris and collaborators, that surely seems possible.

NOTE I am NOT cross promoting MSB. Just illustrating the size of patent holdings and applications for a platform technology can be enormous, and what's acceptable in a process as part of product development and implicitly, new patent development. It must be VERY tightly controlled no doubt about that!

Happy if you find fault in my reasoning, it's what discussion is for. Just putting an alternative view out there.