Big Banks and Business Method Patents
The banking industry and the patent system are longstanding American institutions whose histories date back to the founding of this country. Historically, however, the paths of these two institutions rarely crossed. Although financial firms have been increasing their innovative output for decades now, until recently they relied on trade secrecy, first mover advantages, and other business mechanisms to protect and monetize their intellectual property — not patents. Through a convergence of circumstances over the past several years, that pattern has changed. The shift began when the Federal Circuit decided that business methods — banks’ primary mode of innovation — are patentable subject matter. That decision triggered an increase in the number of business method patents issued by the PTO, and, correspondingly, a surge in patent infringement litigation targeting big banks. When the banks found little success in court, their powerful lobby persuaded Congress to include a special carve out for financial patents in the America Invents Act — the comprehensive patent reform legislation enacted in 2011. Meanwhile, as the financial industry sought legislative favor to ward off future infringement suits, many of the big banks built substantial patent portfolios of their own. This Article explores this nascent relationship and considers some potential implications of growing bank involvement in our patent system. It suggests that the intersection of these institutions could yield some benefit, for example by improving the publicly available information regarding financial innovations. Yet, more pointedly, it warns of possible harms, especially if big banks use their political and economic power to disproportionately influence patent reform and innovation policy in the future.
That Which We Call a Bank: Revisiting the History of Bank Holding Company Regulation in the United States
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) has elevated the importance of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the “BHCA”) – the key statute governing activities and affiliations of U.S. bank holding companies (“BHCs”) – by effectively using it as the model for regulation and supervision of all systemically important financial institutions. The BHCA regulatory regime, however, is a product of unique historical circumstances, which reflects shifting patterns in political and economic struggles and compromises. This Article examines one crucial aspect of this rich and multi-faceted history: the evolution of the BHCA definition of a “bank” and the main statutory exemptions from this definition for industrial loan companies, credit card banks, limited purpose trust companies, credit unions, and thrifts. Despite its seemingly narrow scope, this is a fundamentally important issue. The key to becoming a BHC subject to the many activity restrictions and regulatory intrusions is control or ownership of an entity that is considered a “bank” under the BHCA. Yet, contrary to what most ordinary Americans may think, what makes an institution a “bank” is not self-evident and depends on whether the statute defines it as such. What types of financial institutions that definition includes, or excludes, has changed several times since 1956. This Article presents a brief historical account of how, why, and with what consequences Congress periodically redefined the universe of “banks” and their heavily regulated BHC-parents. The Article discusses the potential impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on the continuing practical relevance of owning or controlling a “bank,” as opposed to any other financial institution specifically exempt from that category, and reflects on some of the broader lessons of the history of the BHCA for the ongoing regulatory reform.
An injectable and thermosensitive hydrogel: Promoting periodontal regeneration by controlled-release of aspirin and erythropoietin.
Periodontitis is an inflammatory disease induced by complex interactions between host immune system and plaque microorganism. Alveolar bone resorption caused by periodontitis is considered to be one of the main reasons for tooth loss in adults. To terminate the alveolar bone resorption, simultaneous anti-inflammation and periodontium regeneration is required, which has not appeared in the existing methods. In this study, chitosan (CS), β-sodium glycerophosphate (β-GP), and gelatin were used to prepare an injectable and thermosensitive hydrogel, which could continuously release aspirin and erythropoietin (EPO) to exert pharmacological effects of anti-inflammation and tissue regeneration, respectively. The releasing profile showed that aspirin and EPO could be continuously released from the hydrogels, which exhibited no toxicity both in vitro and in vivo, for at least 21 days. Immunohistochemistry staining and micro-CT analyses indicated that administration of CS/β-GP/gelatin hydrogels loaded with aspirin/EPO could terminate the inflammation and recover the height of the alveolar bone, which is further confirmed by histological observations. Our results suggested that CS/β-GP/gelatin hydrogels are easily prepared as drug-loading vectors with excellent biocompatibility, and the CS/β-GP/gelatin hydrogels loaded with aspirin/EPO are quite effective in anti-inflammation and periodontium regeneration, which provides a great potential candidate for periodontitis treatment in the dental clinic. Statement of Significance To terminate the alveolar bone resorption caused by periodontitis, simultaneous anti-inflammation and periodontium regeneration is required, which has not appeared in the existing methods. Here, (1) the chitosan (CS)/β-sodium glycerophosphate/gelatin hydrogels loaded with aspirin/erythropoietin (EPO) can form at body temperature in 5 min with excellent biocompatibility in vitro and in vivo; (2) The faster release of aspirin than EPO in the early stage is beneficial for anti-inflammation and provides a microenvironment for ensuring the regeneration function of EPO in the following step. In vivo experiments revealed that the hydrogels are effective in the control of inflammation and regeneration of the periodontium. These results indicate that our synthesized hydrogels have a great potential in the future clinical application.