μBricks® – Microengineering and Management Consulting

uBricks Research is a Microengineering and Management Consulting firm offering μBricks® Consulting Services, a suite of engineering and advisory services for the microsystems, microelectronics, sensors and device packaging communities. We support all aspects of technology and product development using  a centrally managed global innovation network of over 3000 scientists, engineers and management professionals to offer timely solutions to the most pressing technical and business challenges facing product development teams pursuing heterogeneous integration.

We are developers of  Microbricks™, a proprietary package-centric modular technology for microsystems integration and heterogeneous complexity buildup that we make available to our engineering clients.


μBricks® – Contract R&D

We provide contract R&D services in areas such as heterogeneous integration, microsystems packaging, custom equipment development, reliability assessment, evolutionary automation and related technical fields.

We also provide studies and assessments in support of design for manufacturing, outsourced fabrication, EMI/RF compatibility, ionizing radiation effects and system reliability. We are experts in end-to-end cost analysis projections and return on assets studies, including project ROI estimates.

µBricks® – Microbricks™ Architecture

We offer µBricks® product development services based on our  Microbricks™ architecture, a growing array of integrated microsystems  that are modular, interoperable and mass producible for cost-effective and reliable integration of complex products as part of complete solutions.

Microbricks based solutions are thought out as architecturally centered on the package and/or the product rather than on the device or the logic cell, the traditional practice in conventional microelectronics.

Microbricks™ are not conventional electronic packages for circuit board integration; instead,  they are conceived as “parts of products and systems”,  designed  in diverse forms and shapes for embedding microsystems in ways that simplify integration in higher level mechanisms, systems and distributed solutions.

µBricks® – Package-Centric Engineering

µBricks® Package-Centric Engineering Services offers a growing array of heterogeneous integration resources. We support the development of products based on heterogeneous integration of logic, RF, sensors and energy sources with emphasis on hierarchical and modular microengineering methods. We continue to develop novel assembly, testing and simulation tools;  supplemented by a growing global network of partners, to better facilitate the integration of components in heterogeneous systems and unique end-products.

µBricks® – Numerical Simulation and Analysis

We provide design engineering services supported by a complete suite of CAD and numerical simulation tools.

We provide Solid Modeling, FEA Analysis, Electron Device Studies and MEMS/MST Comprehensive Simulations including Reliability and Radiation Effects Studies.

We also provide RF Analysis, Optical System, Package Level Design and Simulation; and complete Circuit and Board Level Design Services.

Our internal capabilities are greatly expanded with that of our consulting network that now exceeds 3000 scientists, engineers and academics worldwide.

µBricks® – Strategy and Business Consulting

We offer the services of a large network of strategy, M&A and product development experts.

These consultants are distributed in over 12 countries, across most research initiatives and have hands-on management experience in industries including semiconductor equipment, microelectronics fabrication, sensors and displays, and robotics and automation.

µBricks® – Competitive Intelligence

We provide up-to-date analysis of public information sources and competitive assessments to semiconductor and microsystems companies, investment organizations and government agencies worldwide.  We focus mainly in R&D activities in the Semiconductor and Microsystems technology spaces with services that include  Patent Activity Monitoring, R&D  Risk Analysis, and R&D Joint Ventures / Alliances Assessments.

We have over 200 consulting partners in our network directly involved in most major research initiatives involving semiconductor, miniaturization and heterogeneous integration what allow us to provided unbiased and up-to-date technological assessments in support of resources realignments, structured deals and executive decisions.

Optobricks™ – Modular Integrated Optical Circuits

Optobricks™ is our rapid prototyping architecture for researchers and system developers creating products that would benefit from availability of integrated optical circuits.

The goal of the package-centric Optobricks™ architecture is to replace optical breadboard tables and associated components used in optics laboratories.

Our firm has developed proprietary architectures, fabrication methods and Optobricks-FAB™ , an assembly tool for enabling low cost prototyping of optical circuits using mostly off-the-shelf parts.

Microbricks™ – From Modular Microsystems Prototyping to Flexible Automated Manufacturing

Is mass market manufacturing dead in developed countries where labor and services cost more, and where costs or regulations are higher?  Accumulating empirical evidence suggests that this is the case, at least if we do not consider the many avenues that innovation provides us.

uBricks Research and others now believe it is possible to successfully compete anywhere in the world, even under burdening  OECD countries cost structures and  even in consumer mass markets, and even in light of massive assembly efficiencies enabled by low cost workers.

Although mass manufacturing based on low margins, massive volume  and production line assembly efficiencies based on humans may be dead in the OECD countries in light of structural cost differentials;  uBricks Research believes that endless and pervasive innovation along with efficient mass customization may enable higher productivity manufacturing workers that can successfully compete against assembly line efficiencies supported by lower productivity workers.

Imagine product shelves stuffed by endless rows of similar but also endlessly different products, not the Wal*Mart way with two or three different mass produced items for each class; but the eBay way with 1000 of choices delivering different features, colors and shapes; simply said imagine a battle of infinite diversity at affordable yet not too low prices versus narrow choice at ultra low prices. This may work because there is evidence that for the case of manufactured products,  consuming middle classes all over the world seem to prefer affordable originality instead of ultra-low price commonality.  

Northern Italy is perhaps one of the best examples of a region that through specialization and vast diversification of small businesses has been able to maintain high standards of living in the face of growing costs and foreign competition.  Emphasis on unique design, focus on choice,  and infinite diversification amidst close cooperation have successfully driven the business strategy of the Northern Industrial Districts of Italy and its surrounding regions.  Other regions of the world have also developed uniquely distinctive industrial clusters.

Creating this enormous level of diversity at affordable prices may require rethinking not only the way we fabricate but also the way we design and promote our products; it requires a profound rethinking of our business models.

Microbricks™ is the answer that uBricks Research is proposing for reviving a narrow segment of the manufacturing industry dealing with consumer electronics in the US and EU by means of endless diversification and cooperation.  Why? Because Microbricks™ is not only about manufacturing efficiencies at any given level,  instead it is about maximum aggregation of value throughout the value chain.

Microbricks™ requires rethinking how we create components, not based on mass production but on effective mass customization. It also requires to rethink our businesses since we will no longer be supplying components for integration as part of  printed circuit boards, instead we sell integrated heterogeneous microsystems or Microbricks™ for utilization as part of end-products and mechanisms.

Designing Microbricks™ and the businesses that supply them requires acknowledging that, in the future, heterogeneous integration will force us to think on products and packages before we do on its most basic components, that is we must think our products using package-centric℠ and product-centric℠ engineering and design techniques.

Organizations and product development teams that adopt Microbricks™ as a design method and implementation technology will move up the value chain, and free themselves from the “commoditizing” race to the bottom that has traditionally squeezed profits out of component suppliers; and enable product lines that can compete for global markets through differentiation, segmentation and innovation.

News: US Congress Passes Critical Changes to US Patent System: Summary for Entrepreneurs and SBMEs

US Congress passed the Leahy-Smith America’s Invent Act of 2011 on September 2011.  These Act represents the most extensive review of the US Patent System in over 20 years.  There are clear effects on entrepreneurs and small companies in several favorable and unfavorable ways.

A short extract of the changes, that we believe, most clearly impact US and foreign entrepreneurial companies follows:

Sec. 3 – First Inventor to File.

  • Transitions the U.S. to a first-inventor-to-file patent system from a first-to-invent while maintaining a 1-year grace period for disclosures.
  • Establishes “derivation” proceeding in place of interference proceeding for first-inventor-to-file applications and patents.

Sec. 4 – Inventor’s Oath or Declaration.

  • Provides for assignee filing when the inventor is unable or unwilling to do so.

Sec. 5 – Defense to Infringement Based on Prior Commercial Use.

  • Expands defense to affiliates.
  • Expands defense to all areas of technology (beyond current restriction to business methods).
  • Requires showing of both reduction to practice and commercial use at least 1 year before effective filing date.
  • Provides exception for patents owned by universities or their technology transfer organizations.

Sec. 6 – Post-Grant Review Proceedings.

  • Replaces “optional inter partes reexamination” with “inter partes review” to be conducted by Patent Trial and Appeal Board within 1 year (with possible 6-month extension for good cause); available for life of patent after later of 9 months from grant or termination of post-grant review; not available if filed more than 1 year after service of infringement complaint or if petitioner previously filed DJ action alleging invalidity; basis limited to patents or printed publications; provides for intervening rights re any new or amended claims. Threshold showing is “reasonable likelihood” that the petitioner will prevail. Estoppel standard is “raised or reasonably could have raised” before the USPTO and the courts. Director may limit number of proceedings in first 4 years.
  • Establishes “post-grant review” before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to review validity of issued patents within 9 months of grant on any patentability issue except best mode; not available if petitioner previously filed DJ action alleging invalidity; review should be completed within 1 year (with a possible extension of 6 months for good cause); provides for intervening rights re any new or amended claims. Threshold showing is “more likely than not” that at least 1 of the claims is unpatentable. Estoppel standard is “raised or reasonably could have raised” before the USPTO and the courts. Director may limit number of proceedings in first 4 years.
  • Provides for settlement agreements to be treated as “business confidential information” at the request of a party to the proceeding.

Sec. 7 – Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

  • Establishes Board to include the Director, the Deputy Director, the Commissioners for Patents and Trademarks and the administrative patent judges, to replace the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. Appeals, derivation proceedings, post-grant reviews, and inter partes reviews will be heard by at least 3 members of the Board.

Sec. 8 – Preissuance Submissions by Third Parties.

  • Allows third parties to submit printed publications of potential relevance to examination either before the earlier of a notice of allowance or the later of 1) 6 months after publication of the application or 2) date of first rejection, accompanied by a fee and a concise description of the asserted relevance of the submitted document.

Sec. 10 – Fee Setting Authority.

  • Defines “micro entity” (to include universities) and provides for 75% fee reduction for those applicants.
  • Requires additional $400 fee (with 50% reduction for small entities) for patent applications not filed by electronic means; these fees would not be available for obligation or expenditure.

Sec. 11 – Fees for Patent Services.

  • Establishes prioritized examination fee of $4,800 (above usual fees) with 50% reduction for small entities, effective 10 days after enactment.
  • Implements 15% surcharge on all patent fees, effective 10 days after enactment.

Sec. 12 – Supplemental Examination.

  • Establishes process for a patent owner to request supplemental examination of a patent to consider, reconsider, or correct information believed to be relevant to the patent.
  • Upon a determination that a “substantial new question of patentability” is raised, the Director must order an ex parte reexamination.
  • A patent shall not be held unenforceable in litigation on the basis of conduct relating to information considered in a supplemental examination if such is concluded before the date an action is brought.
  • If the Director becomes aware of material fraud during the supplemental examination, the Director may take appropriate action and must refer the matter to the Attorney General.

Sec. 15 – Best Mode Requirement.

  • Eliminates as a defense in infringement actions the alleged failure to disclose the best mode for carrying out the subject invention.

Sec. 16 – Marking.

  • Provides for virtual marking by posting patent information on the Internet.
  • Virtual marking provisions apply to all pending and future infringement cases.
  • Provides that only the U.S. may sue for the penalty authorized by the false marking statute.
  • Civil suits re false marking are limited to persons who suffer a competitive injury;
    damages adequate to compensate for the injury may be recovered.

Sec. 17 – Advice of Counsel.

  • Provides that failure of an infringer to obtain advice of counsel can not be used to prove willfulness or induced infringement.

Sec. 18 – Transitional Program for Covered Business Method Patents.

  • Establishes an 8-year transitional post-grant review proceeding for review of the validity of certain business method patents.
  • Covered patents include those that claim a method or corresponding apparatus for performing data processing operations utilized in the practice, administration, or management of a financial product or service, but not patents for technological inventions; effective date is 1 year after enactment and applies to patents issued before, on, or after that date.
  • Petitioner for review must have been sued for, or charged with, infringement of the subject patent.
  • Provides that an ATM is not a “regular and established place of business” for venue purposes.

Sec. 19 – Jurisdiction and Procedural Matters.

  • Clarifies federal court jurisdiction over patent and copyright cases.
  • Establishes requirements for joinder of accused infringers in patent cases.

Sec. 32 – Pro Bono Program.

  • Director shall work with IP law associations in the establishment of pro bono programs designed to assist financially under-resourced independent inventors and small businesses.

Sec. 33 – Limitation on Issuance of Patents.

  • Codifies “Weldon Amendment” to prohibit issuance of a patent on “a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.”

Sec. 35 – Effective Date.

  • Provides an effective date of 1 year after enactment unless otherwise specified.

Sec. 37 – Calculation of 60-Day Period for Application of Patent Term Extension

  • Requires that the date of marketing approval, to begin the 60-day calculation, is the next business day if the time of transmission of approval is after 4:30 P.M., Eastern Time
  • Applies to any application for term extension pending on, filed after, or as to which a decision regarding the application is subject to judicial review on, the date of enactment.