highly improbable that any future Government regulations would be issued requiring public use of the inventive illuminating device.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(3). An illuminating device, as developed by the present invention, wherein unique and novel means are employed to ensure even distribution of light over a curved instrument panel dial face, is not such a device as would have any direct effect on, or direct relation to, the public health or the public welfare.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(4). The present invention is considered to be in the field of science or technology of illumination, as particularly applied to panel lighting. In the field of panel lighting, which is considered to have many problems analogous to those of the general field of illumination, significant privately-funded experience has been gained in the aircraft industry and in the manufacture of instrumentation panels for laboratories, hospital room control centers, electrical control boards for radio and TV studios, and to some extent for automobiles and other vehicles. Thus, it would appear clear that the above information not only supports a finding that there has been significant experience in the invention field through the expenditure of private funds, but also establishes a showing that the Government has not been the principal developer of the field, and that acquisition of exclusive rights would appear not to confer a preferred or dominant position on the Petitioner. Such lack of potential dominance or preference by the Petitioner, should it acquire exclusive patent rights, appears further supported by the

NASA technical evaluator's statement that other adequate lighting devices are known and used for the same purposes as the present invention.

The Board further expressly finds, as required by Section 1245.106(c), that in view of Petitioner's plans and intentions, waiver of title would be an effective incentive to bring the invention to the point of practical application at the earliest practicable date. To support a favorable finding under this subsection, the Petitioner notes that although the invention has already been developed to the point of practical application, and has in fact been commercially exploited through actual sales and substantial and continuing commercial orders, these expenditures were made, at least in part, in the expectation of receiving a waiver of title to the invention. Moreover, the Petitioner further notes that it has made extensive private investments to protect its patent rights both in this country and in a number of foreign countries, and perhaps more important, it positively states that the incentive of patent protection is required to encourage its continuance and implementation of present plans and the development of improved versions of the invention for future sales to an anticipated expanding world market.

On the basis of all the above-enumerated findings, the Inventions and Contributions Board concludes that the interests of the United States would be best served by waiving title under Section 1245.106 of the NASA Patent Waiver Regulations of June 1, 1966, and therefore RECOMMENDS THE GRANT OF THE PETITION.

PETITIONER: North American Aviation, Inc.

CONTRACT:

STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Petitioner, North American Aviation, Inc., is a contractor of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, under Subcontract Y20161 R, awarded under Prime Contract NAS 9-170 with McDonnell Aircraft. The petition was made for waiver of title of the United States in an invention entitled "Thrust Measurement," described in an attachment to the petition. The invention was made by Robert W. Postma, an employee of the Petitioner, in the performance of work required under the above-identified contract, and in the manner specified in Section 305(a) of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, as determined by the Administrator. The petition was considered by the Inventions and Contributions Board on October 3 and November 3, 1966.

The Board, having duly considered the allegations and claims of the above-identified petition, expressly makes the findings required under Section 1245.106(b) of the NASA Patent Waiver Regulations (1966), (which Section, in its entirety, is hereby expressly incorporated by reference), and concludes that the invention does not fall within the enumerated proscriptions of the cited Section. The reasons for the Board's findings are stated below, corresponding in each case to the respective criterion set forth in each subsection.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(1). The invention relates to a device and method for measuring thrust, particularly the thrust of a rocket engine to be used with Gemini spacecraft. As such, it is not directly related to a Governmental program for creating, developing, or improving products, processes, or methods for use by the general public.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(2). The invention relates to measurement of thrust forces, particularly with regard to rocket engines. Since this area is not the concern of the general public, the invention is not likely to be required by Governmental regulations for use by the general public.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(3). The utility of the invention is primarily for measuring thrust forces in rocket engines or the like. The measurement of thrust forces does not directly relate to the public health or welfare.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(4). The invention is in the field of technology of force-measuring devices. A wide variety of force-measurement devices and methods have been developed without the aid of Government funding. Dynamometers, strain gauges, accelerometer dvices, and the like, may be included in this area. The Petitioner contends that it has been in a line of business of force-, pressure-, and thrust-measurement devices for several years, and has issued patent licenses under certain of its transducer inventions to several companies engaged in the manufacture of instrumentation. It has submitted several of its privately-acquired patents in this field, and has identified several more inventions that are presently the subject of patent applications. Inasmuch as this invention relates to only a small part of the field of forcemeasurement devices, and, moreover, since Honeywell, Marquardt, and Rocket Research have similar devices for performing the same function, the acquisition of exclusive rights to this invention would not confer on the Petitioner a preferred or dominant position.

The Board further expressly finds, as required by Section 1245.106(c), that in view of the Petitioner's plans and intentions, waiver of title would be an effective incentive to bring to fruition Petitioner's past and continuing efforts to bring the invention to the point of practical application at the earliest practicable date.

In the initial consideration of the petition, the Board proposed to recommend denial, on the ground that Petitioner had not shown its plans and intentions to bring the invention to the point of practical application, so as to benefit the public at home. In this regard, Petitioner states that it has had preliminary negotiations with two foreign manufacturers regarding delivery

of hardware incorporating the invention. On request for reconsideration of the petition, the Petitioner asserts that for some weeks prior to the Board's initial finding, it had been negotiating and had expected to execute within a few weeks a domestic nonexclusive license agreement including and concerning the invention. More specifically, the agreement includes not only a license under the patent application and any patent issuing therefrom, but also the transfer to the licensee of technical knowledge, information, drawings, designs, specifications, and know-how. In addition, the licensor proposes to give technical advice and consultation to the licensee, to the extent of 25 man-hours of effort, with respect to the transducer to be licensed. In the opinion expressed by the Petitioner, the prospective licensee has the necessary

technical and marketing skill to bring the benefits of the invention to the U.S. public. In addition to this licensing arrangement, the Petitioner indicates that North American Aviation intends to continue use of the invention in connection with rocket-engine testing.

Another factor that led to the Board's initial unfavorable finding was the apparent lack of commercial application of the invention. It is now pointed out by the Petitioner that the invention's usefulness is not limited to measuring the thrust of small liquid-type rocket engines; in this regard, the Petitioner contemplates that other uses of the device will be explored by its licensee, e. g., g., obtaining time-versusthrust profiles for recoil evaluation in shotguns, rifles, and target handguns; instantaneous weighing of freight transport vehicles while they are moving; and use as an airspeed pressure sensor. In general, the teaching of the invention may have applicability in those transducers that convert a measurand into a displacement and transform the displacement into an electrical signal.

On the basis of all the above-enumerated findings, the Inventions and Contributions Board concludes that the interests of the United States would best be served by waiving title under Section 1245.106 of the NASA Patent Waiver Regulations of June 1, 1966, and therefore RECOMMENDS THE GRANT OF THE PETITION.

PETITIONER: California Institute of Technology CONTRACT: NAS 7-100

INVENTION: Anti-Resonant Mass Spectrometer

STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Petitioner, California Institute of Technology, is a contractor of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, under Contract NAS 7-100. The petition was made for waiver of title of the United States in an invention entitled "Anti-Resonant Mass Spectrometer," described in an attachment to the petition. The invention was made by Robert V. Langmuir, an employee of the Petitioner, in the performance of work required under the above-identified contract, and in the manner specified in Section 305(a) of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, as determined by the Administrator. The petition was considered by the Inventions and Contributions Board on June 23, 1966.

The Board, having duly considered the allegations and claims of the above-identified petition, expressly makes the findings required under Section 1245.106(b) of the NASA Patent Waiver Regulations (1966), (which Section, in its entirety, is hereby expressly incorporated by reference), and concludes that the invention does not fall within the enumerated proscriptions of the cited Section. The reasons for the Board's findings are stated below, corresponding in each case to the respective criterion set forth in each subsection.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(1). The invention relates to an improvement in mass spectrometers of the type normally provided with an analyzing section having a quadruple electrode structure adapted to establish a field through which ions are to be displaced for separation, or separate indication, according to the specific electric charge of the ions. More specifically, the invention relates to a method and means for applying

electrical signals to the quadruple electrode structure, which signals effectively constitute a noise spectrum having a power spectral distribution that has a notch in the region for which a desired ion is resonant. As a result, all ions are rejected by the noise, except the desired ion, which is thus permitted to pass through the field of the electrode structure in an unobstructed manner. While the nature of the invention is such that it can be employed in commercial fields for analyzing the composition of materials, it arose out of work performed under Task Order RD-4, issued pursuant to the aforementioned NASA Contract NAS 7-100, which has as one of its purposes R&D activities leading toward and including the construction of equipment to be considered for inclusion in payloads for flight missions to the moon and planets. Therefore, it appears self-evident that the invention resulted directly from a contractual effort to implement the Government's Space Program, and that it was not developed for use by the general public.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(2). No present governmental regulations are known to have been issued that would require use of the invention by the general public. Moreover, even though the inventive analyzer exhibits commercial promise for determining the composition of materials, its sole intended use under the contract in the payloads of governmental flight missions to the moon and planets would make it unlikely that the Government would issue any regulations in the future requiring its use by or for the benefit of the public.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(3). The invention relates to a device that was designed for use in analyzing materials that are found in

space. Although commercial potential may be visualized for the invention, any use of it by the general public for the benefit of its health or welfare is considered unlikely, and at most merely incidental.

SECTION 1245.106(b)(4). The invention is in the field of technology of mass spectrometers. Petitioner alleges that the Government has not been the principal funder or developer of the field; in support of this assertion, Petitioner states that mass spectrometers and their uses are old and wellknown, and that the inventor of the present invention himself has at least 10 patents that were issued to him prior to his association with this contract. Petitioner further alleges that it is quite well-known that many instrument and electronics manufacturers currently offer such devices for sale, and concludes that it should be apparent that (1) the Government has not been the principal developer of the field; and (2) the acquisition of exclusive rights could not confer on the Petitioner any preferred or dominant position. While the statements of Petitioner cannot be treated as being conclusive, they can be accepted as statements of fact. A cursory review of the field of mass spectrometers clearly shows that early work leading to mass spectrometers began about 1912, that by 1920 they were fairly common devices, and a partial list of vendors appearing at pages 7301-7302 of the 1966 edition of Thomas Registry indicates that there are at least 44 current vendors of spectrometers, many of which suggest that they offer all kinds of spectrometers for sale, while at least eight indicate specifically that they offer mass spectrometers for sale. It is also noted that the patent application clearly states that the invention is an improvement on an existing art, and the scope of the claims is so limited. Hence, from all the facts, taken as a whole, it is held that the Government has not been the principal funder or developer of the field, that con

siderable competition exists in the field, and that this competition would counter any otherwise dominant or preferred position that the Petitioner might achieve from the acquisition of title in the invention.

The Board further expressly finds, as required by Section 1245.106(c), that in view of the contractor's plans and intentions, waiver of title to the contractor would be an effective incentive to bring the invention to the point of practical application at the earliest practicable date. Petitioner asserts that the invention is of a type that will require large amounts of private risk capital to bring it to the point of practical application in ordinary ordinary commerce. Petitioner, through documents attached to the petition, clearly establishes that it has had and now has in existence an active licensing program expressly devoted to introducing new items into the commercial field through the granting of negotiated licenses, with appropriate degrees of protective exclusivity; Petitioner has further established that its licensing program has been successful in introducing new products into the stream of commerce, and that its success can be attributed at least in part to its capability to grant licenses with the degrees of exclusivity necessary to induce expenditures of risk capital in bringing inventions to the public. Thus, in view of Petitioner's past efforts and experience, coupled with its purposes in acquiring waiver of title, as well as its expressed willingness to negotiate a license if waiver should be granted, the effectiveincentive requirement of this Section is

well-established.

On the basis of all the above-enumerated findings, the Inventions and Contributions Board concludes that the interests of the United States would be best served by waiving title under Section 1245.106 of the NASA Patent Waiver Regulations of June 1, 1966, and therefore RECOMMENDS THE GRANT OF THE PETITION.