United States: Sink Or Swim?

Originally published in Plastics in Packaging, December 2006

If you're one of two people being chased by a shark, you don't have to swim faster than the shark, just faster than the other person. That’s the position that many plastics packaging manufacturers find themselves in as they try to navigate a sea of nanotechnology patents while keeping pace with competitors.

What lies beneath the murky waters of nanotechnology patents, and how can a packaging company out-swim even the hungriest of sharks?

The field of plastics packaging has already seen some advances in the use of nanotechnology. Packaging sales associated with nanotechnology are expected to grow from about US $66 million in 2003 to $360 million in 2008, with the amount of such packaging materials for food and beverages expected to increase to about 100 million pounds by 2011. Many of these applications relate to improved barrier properties, which can increase shelf life, or to packaging that can detect spoilage or contamination. Manufacturers that can exploit these new materials will be well positioned to maintain or improve their market share. However, companies that ignore the patent picture will quickly see their advantage disappear.

In an attempt to determine what is being patented in the plastics packaging field and by whom, we recently conducted a search of issued US patents and published US patent publications. For simplicity, we limited our search to the US, which is the source of about 70 percent of all nanotech patents. Not surprisingly, the number of nanotechnology patent applications filed in the US has climbed sharply in recent years. According to one source, the number of these applications increased from about 250 in 1995 to mare than 5,500 in 2003. Searching nanotechnology patents is particularly difficult due to the interdisciplinary nature of the technology and the multiple terminologies used to describe these inventions. While we cannot guarantee that our search was definitive, we are able to detect patterns and draw some conclusions.

The search results were particularly interesting for what they did not find. Despite numerous articles about nanotechnology's potential in packaging applications, the number of patents and published applications was only about 93, many of which are related or arose from the filing of a single initial patent application. While a recent slowdown in the issue of US nanotechnology patents has been noted, that would not explain this relatively low number since our search included published applications.

Not surprisingly, however, the greatest concentration of patents and applications (48 of 93) are in the area of improved barrier materials for films and bottles. The use of nanoscale particles (particularly polymer-clay nanocomposites) in plastics films and bottles, retards the movement of gases (such as oxygen, carbon dioxide, and water), thereby extending the shelf life of the packaged food or beverage. Some of these patents and applications are directed to the polymer-clay nanocomposite itself, while others are directed to the film or bottle, or to the processes by which these nanocomposite products are made. For example, several patents are directed to solving the unique processing problems associated with the use of these nanocomposites, including their exfoliation into individual sheets, their compatibility with particular polymer matrices (such as polyamide film or PET bottle), and their orientation within the polymer matrix. Another area which seems to have concentration of patents and applications (11 of 93) is the use of nanoparticles as oxygen scavengers in polymeric films or containers.

We further analysed our results to determine the owners of the identified patents and applications. Of the 93 patents, the largest number (21) was assigned to AMCOL International, the parent company of Nanocor. Many of these patents are related and are primarily directed to the use of nanoclay composites.These patented nanoclay composites are starting to find their way into commercial products. In particular, the clear polyamide film from Bayer Polymers called Durethan, is said to have unique barrier properties because of its use of Nanocor's patented nanoclay composites.

Apart from AMCOL no company appears to have an overwhelming number of patents in this area. The next largest owner is Honeywell/AlliedSignal (seven patents and applications), followed by Rohm and Haas (five) and the University of South Carolina Research Foundation (five). We also found some activity from filmmakers Eastman Kodak, Pechiney, and PET producer Eastman Chemical, which each had four patents.

These results tend to confirm Professor Lemley's observations (Patenting nanotechnology, November 2005) that, compared with patents in general, nanotechnology patents tend to be mare focused on basic ideas and processes, and are more frequently assigned to universities. The search results show a focus on basic inventions concerning the production of polymer-clay nanocomposites and the ability to use them in making commercial packaging.

It is also interesting that the search did not locate some companies and technologies that might have been better represented. For example, we were surprised that the use of nanotechnology for the detection of spoilage or contaminants, or the release of biocides to counter these problems, was not more heavily represented in the search results, even though such technologies receive a great deal of publicity. It may be that these applications are simply at an earlier stage of development compared with the commercial reality of the improved barrier products.

This all illustrates that increasing numbers of nanotechnology patents are being obtained in the field of plastics packaging. Although most of the patents to date are focused on the use of nanocomposites to improve the barrier properties of films and bottles, it can be expected that the number of patents directed to other packaging applications (such as the detection and inhibition of spoilage and contaminants) will also soon increase. Only one company seems to have obtained a large number of patents in this general area, while the majority of patents are widely distributed among a number of assignees, and no company seems to have obtained a large portfolio in multiple packaging applications.

To keep afloat in the marketplace, packaging companies will inevitably make greater use of nanotechnology to offer new products with superior properties. In charting their course, however, they need to recognise that they will need patents of their own to protect their products from pirates or to trade with other companies. Despite a sunny product outlook, the sea may be teeming with activity right below the surface.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.