There are several emerging technology clusters in the induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) space. Simon Elliot and I conducted a patent landscape analysis focusing on issued U.S. patents and pending applications. We found several geographical clusters and a trend in the development of the technology away from the use of genetic transforming factors. A brief report on our analysis was recently published on line – “Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: A U.S. Patent Landscape Analysis.”
This report is interesting not only from a patent analyst’s perspective of tracking the evolution of IP in a particular technology, but also because it shows a clear evolution of the technology and processes for achieving the same result using different techniques.
Disclaimer
This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.
Related Insights
January 9, 2026
Foley Viewpoints
New York Further Amends CPLR §2106, Broadening and Clarifying the Use of Affirmations in Lieu of Affidavits and Other Sworn Statements
The evolution of Section 2106 from a narrow, procedural shortcut into a comprehensive substitute for affidavits, verifications, and other sworn statements marks a significant modernization and streamlining of New York practice, with this new amendment reflecting the legislature’s intent to align more with federal practice while preserving New York’s own unique statutory requirements.
January 9, 2026
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Navigating Workplace AI When Federal, State Policies Clash
January 9, 2026
Foley Viewpoints