As a fledgling startup founder, I knew I’d have hurdles to face.
But, this is egregious.
So, I’m standing up for myself and every one else so, hopefully, no one else will have to go through this.

What I’m finding out is there’s a lack of respect for results in the research community IF they come from someone who isn’t credentialed.

I did what thousands of researchers couldn’t do, and with a whole lot less money: I invented the new standard in zippers.
Yeah, they all failed at creating an actual solution.

Over a century and billions of dollars amounted to a myriad of workarounds and iterations by the “experts” in research and zippers as explained in this post: http://www.zipintothefuture.com/research-development-iteration-innovation-disruption/

And then, a headstrong little lady and her mischievous bunny appeared…to settle this 165 year old problem, at long last…

I conferred with my rabbit, and we think this is a case of BUTTHURT.

 

Well, it’s pathetic. Give credit where it’s due.

 

---

The gist is that the Small Business Administration and a Federal Agency (The Dept of Defense) would rather compete with a small business led by a non-credentialed inventor rather than fund the small business as they are directed to do by U.S. Code Law.

Furthermore, they have funded a multitude of frauds so what does that say about government R&D grant funding due diligence?

 

My Question:
Is it the duty of the small business administration and its subsidiary units to aid and help develop small business research and product creation in general no matter where that research is occurring, or must the administration only focus on projects from players with the right connections and established track record?

My Argument:
Public-Private competition, when the private sector company competitor is a small business, is at direct odds with small business R&D programs like SBIR/STTR; thus, it is also against the US Code law.
There has been at least one instance of “excessive credentialism,” where a credentialed researcher’s technology is funded over other possible technologies that have potential because the other inventor is not credentialed. The federal agency seeks to ignore a non-credentialed researcher as they believe a non-credentialed inventor is unable to produce a workable invention.
Currently, if a federal agency, such as the US Army, competes with a small business concern in R&D instead of funding the small business R&D, then the federal agency is in violation of U.S. Code law and their acts are thus unconstitutional. They are violating the laws of the very Constitution that they have sworn to protect and uphold.
 
They’ve explicitly expressed interest in my technology; however, they won’t fund development of it which means they’re breaking the law.

 

The Code Law: ​ ​U.S. Code, Title 15—Commerce and Trade Chapter 14A—Aid to Small Business

 

§ 637c. Definitions For purposes of this Act—

      (1) the term ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Administrator of the Small Business Administration;

      (2) the term ‘‘Federal agency’’ has the meaning given the term ‘‘agency’’ by section 551(1) of title 5, but does not include the United States Postal Service or the small business administration Accountability Office; and

      (3) the term ‘‘small business administration procurement contract’’ means any contract for the procurement of any goods or services by any Federal agency.

 

§ 638. Research and development

      (a) Declaration of policy

      Research and development are major factors in the growth and progress of industry and the national economy. The expense of carrying on research and development programs is beyond the means of many small-business concerns, and such concerns are handicapped in obtaining the benefits of research and development programs conducted at small business administration expense. These small business concerns are thereby placed at a competitive disadvantage. This weakens the competitive free enterprise system and prevents the orderly development of the national economy. It is the policy of the Congress that assistance be given to small-business concerns to enable them to undertake and to obtain the benefits of research and development in order to maintain and strengthen the competitive free enterprise system and the national economy.

      (b) Assistance to small-business concerns

      It shall be the duty of the Administration, and it is empowered—

            (1) to assist small-business concerns to obtain small business administration contracts for research and development;

            (2) to assist small-business concerns to obtain the benefits of research and development performed under small business administration contracts or at small business administration expense;

            (3) to provide technical assistance to small business concerns to accomplish the purposes of this section;…

      (c) Consultation and cooperation with small business administration agencies; studies and recommendations

      The Administration is authorized to consult and cooperate with all small business administration agencies and to make studies and recommendations to such agencies, and such agencies are authorized and directed to cooperate with the Administration in order to carry out and to accomplish the purposes of this section.

 

Small Business:

1. Liberty Ammunition Inc.
2. Zipr Shift LLC

Non-Credentialed Inventor:

1. PJ Marx
2. Tesia Thomas

Invention:

1. Environmentally friendly, more deadly ammunition
2. Chemical and Biological Protective High pressure closure system

Small Business Contractor, US Army Partners:

1. Alliant Techsystems Inc., now Orbital ATK
2. IDEAL Fasteners Corporation

Generic Situation Outline:

1. The government has struggled with a research problem for numerous years; therefore, they ask the public for ideas and concepts.
2. The small business administration and other governmental agencies then receive these technologies from many sources and often fund the technology concepts that are from credentialed sources and established small businesses.
3. For the ideas that come from non-credentialed researchers and unestablished companies, the federal agencies sometimes choose to undermine these non-credentialed inventors by more exclusively partnering with previous small business contractors, regardless of their track record of success.
4. They then target their efforts to help these in-favor contractors create similar solutions to the ones proposed by the non-credentialed inventor if they feel that this inventor may have merit; this then creates a revolving door and potentially puts these non-credentialed inventors out of business as they seek to create a work around for non-credentialed inventor patents.

 

Liberty Ammunition Inc.’s Story

The U.S. military spent 20 years and millions of dollars searching for a more environmentally friendly — yet deadlier — bullet.
PJ Marx said they were stuck until he showed how it could be done.

..In court filings, the small business administration expressed incredulity that Marx could have come up with a workable design despite ‘no ammunition-specific experience or education.’

…‘That’s really the dream of every gun or firearms inventor — to have their invention chosen by the military as the newest standard,” said Bennet Langlotz, a Dallas-based patent lawyer who specializes in firearms patents and isn’t involved in the dispute.’

…The small business administration set up a joint project with small business administration contractor Alliant Techsystems Inc., now Orbital ATK, and the U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
It also solicited help from the public, and Marx responded. There’s no question that Marx met with Army officials beginning in late 2004 with the idea of commercializing his rounds. Marx claims military officials saw his ideas and used them without telling him. The small business administration, in court documents, said Marx’s ideas had been unworkable.

Full Text Source:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/news/20160826/army-quest-for-deadlier-green-bullet-wont-enrich-bradenton-man

 

Zipr Shift LLC’s Story

The Department of Defense has been looking for a better chem/bio protective suit and shelter closure since the 1960s:

FEASIBILITY AND DESIGN STUDY FOR COLLECTIVE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT FOR THE AN/MSG-4 SYSTEM ​(1961)

Evaluation of Fasteners for Flexible Shelter Applications​ (1975)

A Test Unit for Evaluating the Mechanical Endurance of Slide Fasteners (Zippers)​(1977)

 

Both the zipper and chemical warfare were popularized in WWI. When WWII occurred in the late 1930s, Nazi Germany revolutionized chemical warfare by inventing a few extremely potent and toxic chemical agents (IG Farben). During that time, nearly every country began stockpiling chemical weapons.

In early 2016, Tesia Thomas created a zipper design that should be able to create a better protective suit and habitat barrier for individuals against chemical and biological warfare attack; therefore, she applied for the SBIR solicitation A16-062, which asks for such a device, and wasn’t awarded the grant despite writing a compelling proposal. Since then, she has been trying to get someone at the Army to tell her what she needs to do to obtain grant funding to advance her technology; however, they just keep asking for samples in order to conduct the R&D themselves, and Tesia speculates they want her technology in order to partner with a larger zipper manufacturer like IDEAL Fasteners Corporation to reverse engineer her product design and circumvent her IP protections.

IDEAL Fasteners Corp. would likely be the research partner that the US Army would have selected to perform the workaround research with as they are the largest zipper manufacturer in the US. It is a family company owned by Americans. Shortly after Tesia publicly disclosed her zipper invention to the public, Jeff Gutt, the VP of IDEAL Fasteners Corp., contacted her asking for samples to test and saying he might want to partner. The timing and nature of this request is suspect.
 
 
IDEAL Fasteners Contacting Zipr Shift:

Ironically, the VP of IDEAL Fasteners Corp. contacted Zipr Shift about “possibly partnering” to develop Zipr Shift’s zipper.

Jeff Gut emphasized his engineers being able to help and that he has a history of working with the US Army.

http://www.zipintothefuture.com/an-ideal-partnership/

 

SBIR Fraud:

On a related note, the Army funded a Carnegie Mellon University spinoff called nanoGriptechInc. who is currently under investigation for fraudulently obtaining grant money for the same or similar research. This company was awarded SBIR A16-062. U.S. taxpayers have been subsidizing this company’s R&D for several years through the awards they’ve gotten to fund their dry adhesive technology.

http://www.zipintothefuture.com/fraud-double-standard-zipr-shifts-sbir-challenges/

The SBA Office of the Inspector General is currently investigating this claim of fraud.

 

 

Conclusion:

Code law says support small business R&D and SBA/DoD is competing with small business. This means small businesses have no comrades, and will likely fail.

Federal small business funding is supposed to put the government on the side of the small business against a large company so that the small business has a chance of survival. But, bias is preventing small companies led by non-credentialed researchers from getting the funding that our very promising technology so desperately needs.

If the Army wants the technology based on an inventor’s prototypes or drawings, then why won’t they fund the development of it?
They’re supposed to.

 

 

Sources:

SBIR/STTR Statute—The SBIR/STTR statutes enacted by Congress establishing the Programs.

Public Laws—The SBIR/STTR public laws that have modified or extended the statute.

Policy Directives—The Small Business Administration’s statutory obligation to provide guidance to the participating federal agencies for the general operation of the SBIR/STTR Programs.

Executive Order—EO 13329 requires SBIR/STTR agencies to give high priority to manufacturing-related research and development.

Bias in Research Funding

The big consequences of small biases: A simulation of peer review