Subject: Fwd: Con?ict of interest issues Date: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 at 2:21:29 PM Paci?c Standard Time From: Kevin Murphy To: mike.kinkelaar@procopio.com Mike, see note below. The COI meeting is next have a Dean?s meeting tomorrow that I wanted to talk to about The biomedical engineering group has made a lot of leader David Gough, sent me the email like to have this information presented to you by one of the members when you and pattric come todaynuk Begin forwarded message: From: Kevin Murphy Subject: Fwd: Conflict of interest issues Date: November 7, 2017 at 2:18:42 PM PST To: kevinmurphy Begin forwarded message: From: David Gough Subject: Conflict of interest issues Date: November 7, 2017 at 1:15:08 PM PST To: Kevin Murphy Kevin, We talked about how to respond to the COI committee - have way too much experience in this area. Some issues: You don?t actually have a con?ict with regard to private funding, although you may have to argue with the administration over how much UCSD can take out for overhead - several to maybe 25%. If we get government funding, we all have to verify that research funding will not be used for personal gain. This is not a problem if you do not presently have a company, or if your equity in the company is less than 5% of the company?s total funding, or if you are not serving on your company?s board. If you have a company, handling a COI is more complicated, but can still be negotiated and managed. It is important to acknowledge related funding in publications. Very important: only demands from COI that are sent to you in writing need be addressed - make sure the committee understands that you want everything in writing. It is also important to get a letter from COI when there are no remaining issues - it will save you a lot oftime. This technology will probably lead to several patents. As UC employees, we have to disclose IP to the campus tech transfer of?ce and assign patents to the Regents, but we can expect to get royalties (typically, pretty small). The university will ?nd a licensee that is willing to pay patent costs ($20 - 50K) and will handle licsensing (with our recommendations but not our direct involvement). Only people who are directly involved in the inventive step should be listed on patents as inventors - no technicians, graduate-students, etc. (i don?t expect to be listed as an inventor; although I am helping out). It is fine to publicly discuss the problem, but you should not make a premature public disclosure of our detailed solution before getting a provisional patent application number. We should hold off on publications until the patent is submitted. When sending proposals to funding agencies, if it necessary to reveal patentable concepts it is important to include a statement that the proposal contains potentially patentable, con?dential information reviewers are expected to keep our ideas con?dential and, of course, they are not good judges of pate nta bility. For calibration: my company is almost 20 years old and I have had lots of government and private funding in related areas, both through the university and directly to the company. (The same NIH grant manager handles both.) I have disclosed every detail to the COI, have had lots of lectures from them, and have agreed to some minor changes. Best advice: Don?t let get overblown. Best, Dave Gough