The OTC assigns a UT Austin file number to every invention disclosure received at the office, thereby making the technology a part of the OTC database. Additionally, an official written record, called an “active docket” is created. Based on the nature of its science, each invention is assigned to a licensing associate who specializes in the field. Henceforth, the licensing associate assumes responsibility for reviewing the technology and paving its commercialization path. The LAs often meet with the inventors, speak to industry contacts, and conduct self-directed research to aid them in this evaluation process. Further, legal assistance is sought to address issues regarding patentability of inventions.

The Scientific Review
There are three main areas of technology review: technical, commercial, and legal. The first part of the evaluation consists of gauging the quality of science and the feasibility of commercialization. A panel of faculty members, chosen from a larger group called the IP Committee, judges the uniqueness, technical viability, and overall significance of the invention. The IP committee is a group of faculty members specializing in the fields of life and physical sciences. When the OTC receives a disclosure, it is first sent to a few members of this committee for a first opinion on the nature of the science. This is called the “peer review”. In order for a faculty member to act as a peer reviewer, he/she must be a part of the IP committee.

After reviewing the invention, the committee sometimes suggests that the OTC release the technology to the inventor because marketing the technology will be difficult. This, at least temporarily, brings the commercialization endeavor to a halt. However, the OTC will welcome any future developments or new inventions the inventor might choose to present.

If a technology passes the IP committee’s initial test it is ready to continue the commercialization procedure.

The Commercial Review
Good science is merely a prerequisite for further evaluation of the technology. The next step in the process is the commercial or market review. Successful commercialization requires the existence of a strong market need for the innovation and the potential for marketability. To acquire information about these value indicators, the OTC conducts a thorough market review with information gathered from industry personnel, venture capitalists, and analyses conducted at the OTC itself. Before this process is complete, a brief, background check on prior art is run to ensure novelty of the invention. After this comprehensive review, the commercial viability of the invention is determined.
The final step of the process is the legal review. Here legal counsel is sought to determine the legitimacy of IP ownership and licensing rights. A more thorough investigation of prior art is conducted. This legal evaluation aids in answering questions regarding potential roadblocks to patent acquisition and enforceability.

Possible Outcomes
Finally, upon completion of these stages of review, the OTC’s three possible courses of action are:

(1) Actively commercializing
(2) Releasing to inventor
(3) Requesting inventor to present additional work

If the office decides on option (1), the LA assigned to the technology works to strengthen ties with previously identified industry counterparts. The intricacies of this licensing process are discussed in a following section. Option (2) is chosen if the invention fails the scientific assessment, thereby making commercialization infeasible. Option (3) suggests that the OTC finds the invention worthy of commercialization but recognizes it as incomplete. In this case, the OTC returns the disclosure to the inventor for additional work or modifications.