Transcript PowerPoint - From Invention to Startup

UW
APL & CIE
Invention to Start Up
Jack Gallagher
Pierre Mourad
Agenda
• How We Got Started
• University Resources
• Intellectual Property
• Building a Team
• Business Plan
• Funding Sources
• Research Process & Evolution
• Research Concept Findings
• Questions
How We Got Started
•
Random meeting with Allez PhysiOnix
•
Started research at UW in August 2003 (WTC Grants)
•
Negotiated exclusive license to UW technology (Tech
Transfer)
•
First patent published in 2005 (Tech Transfer)
•
Funding from founders, private investors (Angels &
Venture Capital), WTC research grants, NIH Phase 1 and
2 SBIR grants
University Resources
•
Applied Physics Laboratory
•
Department of Neurological Surgery
•
Schools of Dentistry and of Public Health
•
Office of Technology Transfer
•
Washington Technology Center (WTC)
•
Washington Research Foundation (WRF Capital)
Intellectual Property
• Get a good patent attorney
• Extensive review of 500 patents before started
• Patent filed November 2003 (published May 05)
• Additional patents filed in 2006
Building a Team
• Start with Technical Types
• Build & prove out technology
• Need 1 Business / Marketing Type
• Build vision of future, negotiations, legal work, fund raising
• Start part time; eventually convert to full time
Business Plan
• How big is the market
• What is your reason for being i.e. competitive advantage
• What is your anticipated market share
• Projected pricing
• Estimated spending by year
• Planned exit (Sale, IPO)
• Capital requirements by year
• Fund raising strategy
Funding Sources
• Need a strategy
• Founders
• Washington Technology Center (WTC)
• National Institutes of Health (NIH)
• Angels
• Venture Capital
Research Process
Evolution of Research
Concept
Testing:
does the concept
deliver a benefit?
2003-2004
Univ. of
Wash.
& Ultreo
NIH SBIR
Phase I
Grant
Internal
Testing:
what are the
primary benefits?
2004-2006
University of
Washington
WTC Grants
2005-2006
Ultreo, Inc. &
Universities
NIH SBIR
Phase II
Grant
2006-2007
Ultreo, Inc.
Optimize
Parameters:
what is the
optimal
technology
design?
NIH SBIR
Phase II
Grant
External Testing:
independent
confirmation of
safety &
effectiveness
pierre’s turn
some details of the research
• What is old, and how and what old does
• What is new, and how and what new does
• More of what new does
• Summary statement of some partnering lessons I’ve
learned
manual brushes
• manual brushes move several times per second and clean
only at the point of bristle contact
power brushes
• power brushes move their bristles several hundred times per
second and clean primarily at the point of bristle contact, in
a manner vastly more efficient than manual brushes.
power brushes
• However, even the best power brushes still leave behind significant
amounts of plaque in your mouth, much of it in areas where the bristles
don’t contact.
www.studentbmj.com/issues/00/10/education/369.php
• Therefore, the world needs an even better toothbrush.
here it is.
what is special about the Ultreo
• we’ve added optimally configured and delivered
ultrasound to a power toothbrush foundation.
what is special about the Ultreo
• the Ultreo’s bristles scrub on time scales similar to that of
other power toothbrushes - hundreds of times a second.
Thanks to the ultrasoundactivated bubbles, the
Ultreo also removes
plaque bacteria where the
ultrasound and dental
slurry intersect, including
where the bristles may not
reach.
a sense of gentleness
some of our earliest prototypes
we’ve come a long way
• a testimony to the initial vision, the initially applied resources and
alacrity of SAP/APL/Neurosurgery/Pediatric
Dentistry/Periodontology/Public Health, and the subsequent and
considerable effort and expertise utilized at Ultreo, along with
continuing efforts of UW.
vs
• so, does it work?
ultrasound from a stationary brush rapidly
removes a ‘line’ of plaque bacteria.
• Artificial teeth with bacteria dyed pink before (left) and after (right)
application of ultrasound without bristle contact. Discrete bacteria
colonies along a band stretching from lower left to upper right were
removed by the ultrasound activated bubbles, in a shape corresponding
to the shape of ultrasound emitted from the face of the stationary brush
head.
plaque bacteria removal via combined
sonic & ultrasound processes
• Artificial teeth with bacteria dyed pink before (left) and after (right)
treatment with a sonically vibrating brush head that emitted ultrasound
in the presence of sonically produced bubbles, 2-3 mm from the
artificial teeth. Discrete bacteria colonies were reduced or removed
across the entire tooth surface after only 5 seconds of application of
the prototype.
sonic & ultrasound versus sonic only
• Artificial teeth with bacteria dyed pink before (above) and after (below)
treatment with (AA’) a sonically vibrating brush head that emitted
ultrasound in the presence of sonically produced bubbles or (BB’) a
popular power toothbrush, each acting 2-3 mm from the artificial teeth.
Bacteria were removed across the entire tooth surface after only 5
seconds of application of the prototype.
• So, does it work?
yes!
partnership lessons
•
•
•
•
•
•
assuming sufficient technical skills, it is the character of the
people with whom you work that matters the most.
start your research with the clinical problem in mind.
be open to new perspectives and to new knowledge.
appreciate the opportunities afforded by serendipity and be
willing to act, quickly!, in response to those opportunities.
surround yourself with (interdisciplinary) people who
sufficiently interact and are open to the fruits of those
interactions.
make sure your environment facilitates and nurtures those
interactions.
Questions?