Research pillars
Standing lines of work, filed under a research area, each with the question it asks and what it has established so far.
Intellectual Frontiers IP
Intellectual Frontiers IP runs the research programs and holds what they produce. That means the peer-reviewed papers and dated notes where findings get recorded, the patents and defensive disclosures filed or published afterwards, and the marks that go on the methods and services built from them.
Nothing in the register started as a patent idea. Each one started as a problem our research aimed at on purpose: how to reconcile monitor data against the chart, how a referral finds the right specialist with the images already attached, how a person authorizes an outside system to read their record without handing over everything, how a trial runs without a paper binder, how a marketplace settles a transaction and keeps the evidence.
Most of that work is published before anything is filed. Research pillars carry the questions still open. Peer-reviewed papers put findings in front of people who can check them. Research notes date design patterns and operating theories as they get worked out. A filing happens later, when one of those findings turns out to be ownable.
We file when a right changes what we or our licensees can build, and we publish when it does not. That keeps the register small enough that every entry is worth your time. Each one links to the canonical USPTO record so a procurement team or outside counsel can check the status in one click.
The same test decides what is worth filing in the AI era. A claim over doing an old task faster gets designed around, because there are always three other ways to shave the same minutes. A claim over an entirely new form of work holds up, because it describes work nobody was doing before: evidence that assembles itself while a device runs, or an appeals function that reads every denial the day it lands.
Five registers, listed in the order a piece of work moves through them.
Standing lines of work, filed under a research area, each with the question it asks and what it has established so far.
Articles we published in the peer-reviewed literature, mostly with collaborators. Seven so far.
Short dated pieces under a pillar, typed as a design pattern or an operating theory.
Filings where a right is worth holding. Published prior art where it is not.
Three names we use in market, with what each one covers and where it appears.
These claims cover the plumbing that integration projects keep running into: reconciling device and clinical data, routing referrals and task lists, granting and revoking access to records, tracking metrics and telemetry at scale, and settling transactions with an audit trail. The person who invented them has run those projects, so the claims match how the work is actually done.
Buyers usually arrive wanting freedom to operate on a product already in flight, an exclusive position in one field of use, or the family outright so they can stop asking anyone's permission.
Clinical workflow and interoperability claims covering how outside data gets reconciled into a chart and put in front of a clinician.
Device data, remote monitoring, and connectivity claims for products that have to send readings somewhere and prove they arrived.
Self-controlled authorization to records and blockchain-backed service delivery evidence: the decision and proof paths insurance operations run on.
Digital native trials management, precision education and training, credentialing, digital payments, and marketplace settlement, plus the metric queues and telemetry that keep any of it observable.
A field-of-use license is the usual route. The buyer names the market and the product, we grant rights inside that field, and both sides write down the term, the diligence obligations, and what happens if the product never ships. Remote monitoring, for instance, can be licensed without touching trials management.
An outright purchase is available for families we no longer need to hold. We will tell you which ones those are rather than renting out an asset we have no intention of maintaining.
Co-development is the third route. Intellectual Frontiers Studios supplies operators who have been through an FDA submission, a device integration, or a records authorization rollout, and the license comes with them.
We need to know the product, the market, whether you want exclusivity, and when it ships. We come back with a structure and a number.
Engineering and product teams do not need a license to start reading. Every family page lists its filings, their USPTO status, and a link to the full document, so a team can see the claims before anyone calls a lawyer.
The defensive disclosures are free to use by design. Where we decided a right was not worth holding, we published the idea into the prior art so nobody else could fence off ground our customers rely on.
Pick the register that matches what you came for.
Every filing, disclosure, and landscape study we own, in one filterable register.
The standing lines of research behind the filings, organized by research area, with notes typed as design patterns or operating theories.
Articles we wrote or co-wrote, with their DOIs.
One entry per invention, with every filing, its USPTO status, and the canonical record.
Three names in use, and what sits behind each one.
What the claims cover, in language a procurement or product team can act on without counsel.
Published prior art, free to use. Read these before assuming a technique is owned.
For inventors and partners with something we should test, file, or publish.