SBIR first decade-results,benefits, problems from a Michigan perspective

This paper reports on the economic contributions and impact of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program in Michigan during the first decade. The Michigan SBIR experience is examined to learn how researchers and small businesses use the SBIR Program, whether to start or strengthen businesses, how they view SBIR after a decade, and how the program has served Michigan businesses that have successfully carried out Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III SBIR projects. From the beginning of the SBIR Program, MERRA has coordinated annual SBIR conferences for Michigan companies. The MERRA staff has helped small businesses prepare suitable R&D projects and write effective SBIR proposals. Numerous SBIR awards have resulted from MERRA supportive efforts, and the MERRA small business outreach activity has kept MERRA in touch with successful firms to assist them in getting the best results from their SBIR projects and to assess progress. For this study, in-depth evaluations were made of various Michigan firms that won SBIR awards, including both mature small businesses and start-up companies to learn in what ways their SBIR experiences are parallel and in what ways they diverge. The study covers those that have used SBIR funds to diversify and add new areas of business to existing core areas. Other companies examined were created by researchers associated with universities, industry, or research organizations who utilized SBIR awards to assist in starting new businesses. Also considered were Michigan companies at different levels of development that have employed SBIR awards as seed money to perfect innovative new products for marketing.     

The Lion, the Dragon and the Wardrobe Guarding the Doorway to Information and Communications Privacy on the Internet: A Comparative Case Study of Hong Kong and Singapore - Two Differing Asian Approaches

Almost a decade ago, the electronic commerce revolution began,led by such companies as Amazon.com and Ebay.com. These companieshave grown into the internet business giants they are today,diversifying in the products they sell, the services they provideand the jurisdictions they conduct business in. However, asidefrom these rare examples, most medium and small internet-basedbusiness enterprises have grown with the dot.com bubble anddissolved when it burst mid-way through the decade. Now, atthe 10th Anniversary of Electronic Commerce, after we have seenthe dot.com way of doing business launch like a rocket and plungelike a comet, subsequently emerging into a more cautious, butno less potential, avenue of doing business, other challengesnow face the industry as a whole to retain and obtain customers.Internet users are becoming increasingly wary of online transactions.²The irony is that as internet users become technologically savvy,they also become more aware of the dangers which connectivityentails and this inhibits their online behaviour. Chief amongthese concerns, and second only to cybercrimes, is the maintenanceof privacy in the context of the protection of personal information,particularly from the unsavory elements trawling the cyberworld.For cyber-trade and the e-commerce market to grow, and for thecontinued efficiency and utility of the internet for G2C andB2C transactions,³ governments and industries must re-instillthe trust and confidence of internet users both in commercialand non-commercial interaction.⁴     

“We really don’t want to move,but...”: identity and strategy in the internationalisation of industrial R&;D

In Norway, as in many other high-cost OECD countries in a geographical and cultural periphery, policy-makers seem to have given up attempts at attracting large numbers of foreign R&D investments. Instead, a major focus of innovation policies is to help companies internationalise yet with an aim to maintain or even increase their level of R&D and other innovation activities nationally. Based on case studies of eight Norwegian companies and their motives for and experiences with internationalisation of R&D, this article questions this policy. From the perspective of the companies, many factors explain how, why and where they carry out their R&D activities.      

The rule of law online: Treating data like the sale of goods: Lessons for the internet from OECD and CISG and sacking Google as the regulator

The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) in the case of Google Spain SL v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) ² [“the Google decision”] to require Google to enforce a right to be forgotten has caused a furore and sets a dangerous precedent in internet regulation. ³ It is setting up the search engine as a form of Internet Government and fracturing the balance between privacy and freedom of information in the connected world. In a world where we have become attuned to full exposure by routinely signing over access to information, privacy is no longer the issue – the real concern is control. This paper seeks to address the issues of whether we have a right to privacy anymore, who should be making decisions about what is available and where and how a global convention on access to information might be achieved.     

A Case Study of Semiotic Distinctiveness in Brand Names

Brand names constitute a form of value for commercial products, because they suppose a savings of search costs for the consumer. The law, as a consequence, has the obligation to protect brand names. But the number of attractive brand names is not infinite and sometimes companies seek brand names which are reminiscent of others. In this article a conflict between two companies for the distinctiveness of two brand names is addressed: one Spanish company used the English common noun doughnut for a product similar to the American pastry, while the other company had already registered donut as a brand name, in addition to its variants. This second company sued the first on the grounds that the names were not distinctive. Here we offer the arguments presented to the judge in defense of the distinctiveness of doughnut and the judgment.     

Food Fraud and the Partnership for a ‘Healthier’ America: A Case Study in State-Corporate Crime

At a moment of heightened public concern over food-related health issues, major corporations in the food industry have found their products and practices under scrutiny. Needing to be understood as socially responsible, these corporations have established partnerships with the state to construct a positive, proactive, and cooperative public image. One major public–private partnership that evolved from former First Lady Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move initiative—the Partnership for a Healthier America—serves as a case study in this paper, which analyzes the consequences and social harms perpetuated by a public health campaign bound by the imperative to maximize profit. By using trusted state actors to deliver accurate but deceptive claims about food companies’ commitment to public health, this public–private partnership actively misleads the public and potentially exacerbates public health challenges, warranting a skeptical revision of how we understand corporate social responsibility and neoliberal governance on issues of health and nutrition. As a form of fraud, these attempts to mislead the public go beyond the actions of public sector individuals or members of corporate boards, but are structurally incentivized by the legal rights, regulatory privileges, and profit-related incentives central to the modern corporate form. While conventional criminological research tends to underemphasize state and corporate harms, we make use of a critical criminological perspective to analyze state-corporate partnerships in the space between food industry practices and public health policy.     

Profiling the mobile customer – Is industry self-regulation adequate to protect consumer privacy when behavioural advertisers target mobile phones? – Part II

Mobile customers are increasingly being tracked and profiled by behavioural advertisers to enhance delivery of personalized advertising. This type of profiling relies on automated processes that mine databases containing personally-identifying or anonymous consumer data, and it raises a host of significant concerns about privacy and data protection. This second article in a two part series on “Profiling the Mobile Customer” explores how to best protect consumers’ privacy and personal data through available mechanisms that include industry self-regulation, privacy-enhancing technologies and legislative reform.¹ It discusses how well privacy and personal data concerns related to consumer profiling are addressed by two leading industry self-regulatory codes from the UK and the U.S. that aim to establish fair information practices for behavioural advertising by their member companies. It also discusses the current limitations of using technology to protect consumers from privacy abuses related to profiling. Concluding that industry self-regulation and available privacy-enhancing technologies will not be adequate to close important privacy gaps related to consumer profiling without legislative reform, it offers suggestions for EU and U.S. regulators about how to do this.²     

Governance by EU emissions trading: resistance or innovation in the oil industry?

Studies of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) abound. Much is known about the economic incentives they contain to promote abatement and innovation, and studies are focusing on the short-term aggregate effects at sector and system levels. Less, however, is known about how the EU ETS affects companies, including their strategies, long-term innovation plans, and deployment of low-carbon solutions. This article presents an analytical framework of how companies are likely respond to regulation like the EU ETS, subsequently applied to companies in the oil industry, represented by the major multinationals ExxonMobil and Shell. The analysis finds that these companies had quite different initial responses to the ETS, whereas their long-term strategic responses to carbon pricing show signs of convergence.     

Universities and Patent Demands

Research universities have made enormous contributions to the field of medicine and the treatment of human disease. Alone or in collaboration with pharmaceutical companies, academic researchers have added to the store of knowledge that has led to numerous life science breakthroughs. A new chapter may be opening for academic researchers, however, that could lead to a darker tale. ‘The mouse that trolled: the long and tortuous history of a gene mutation patent that became an expensive impediment to Alzheimer''s research, by Bubela et al., chronicles one such tale.’ The authors do an excellent job of bringing to life the twisting saga that engulfed numerous academic and non-profit Alzheimer''s researchers over many years. The authors note that the story is an outlier, but sadly, that may not be the case. There are increasing signs that academic researchers and their institutions are being caught up in the rush for gold that is accompanying the proliferation of the non-practicing entity business model. As I have noted before, academic institutions have a dual role, as keepers of the academic flame and guardians of the public monies entrusted to them through state and federal research funding. The specter of taxpayer money being used, not to advance research and for the betterment of society, but as part of schemes to extract money from productive companies may not sit well with voters, and ultimately, with legislators. In that case, researchers and institutions themselves may have much to lose.‘The Mouse that Trolled: The Long and Tortuous History of A Gene Mutation Patent That Became an Expensive Impediment to Alzheimer''s Research’ describes an important case in which a gene mutation patent, owned by a non-practicing entity, was asserted against researchers studying the causes and effects of Alzheimer''s disease. Non-practicing entities (NPEs) are parties whose core activity involves licensing or litigating patents, rather than making products. The article details nearly two decades of litigation—targeted at universities, foundations, and non-profits—and illustrates the immeasurable damage to disease research caused by the battle. Although the authors examine a single example of an NPE targeting biopharmaceutical research, observational evidence suggests that such cases will be neither rare nor uncommon across time, raising concerns about the way in which the public interest may be lost along the way. Particularly troubling is the possibility that universities themselves may increasingly partner with NPEs, in an effort to join the patent gold rush.Universities play a dual role in society, serving both as keepers of the academic flame and as guardians of society''s money. State and federal governments entrust universities with substantial amounts of research funding in the hope that academic minds can contribute to the store of knowledge that will lead to societal improvements in human health, technology, and other fields. And universities have, indeed, made profound contributions to knowledge and innovation, from which all of society has benefitted. In fact, in an effort to facilitate the translation of academic research into products for society, Congress adopted the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act.¹ Prior to Bayh-Dole, commentators had complained that the ‘return on investment’ from public research funding for universities failed to justify the dollars spent.² Bayh-Dole attempted to rectify that problem by allowing universities to control patenting and licensing of inventions created with federal money.³ The goal was to facilitate the creation of actual products from the storehouse of knowledge resulting from public funding of university research. In keeping with the idea that universities are trustees of public resources, Bayh-Dole created an environment in which universities would foster innovation through the commercial application of its patents.Bayh-Dole flowed from the basic principle that patents are granted, not solely to reward the inventor, but rather to incentivize activity that benefits society as a whole.⁴ In granting patents, we temporarily remove items from the store of what would otherwise be free to all and reserved to none in the hopes that this will redound to the benefit of society at large.⁵ Thus, patents are not the natural right of an inventor, but rather are rights created by the sovereign in the United States for limited societal purposes.⁶The federal government itself recently explored this concept in arguments before the Federal Circuit—the appeals court that hears cases related to patents—in Astornet Technologies Inc. v. BAE Systems, Inc. In Astornet, the patent holder claimed that three government contractors had violated its patent with their equipment to authenticate boarding passes at airports.⁷ The court dismissed the claims under 28 U.S.C. §1498, which stipulates that when the government uses a patented invention, any patent infringement action must be taken against the United States and not the individuals of companies with whom it contracts.⁸The government''s amicus curiae noted that the US does not ‘infringe’ when it uses a patented invention without authorization, and commentators have pointed out that according to this characterization, one must never think of the US as an ‘infringer,’ but rather as a sovereign that has simply chosen to offer compensation.⁹ According to the brief, the court cannot interpret the U.S. government''s actions as patent infringement. Rather, 28 U.S.C. §1498 stipulates that the only remedy for damages caused by the government''s use of a patent is just compensation after a complaint has been raised in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. In other words, the government can always use a patent without permission, as long as it provides compensation at a later date if and only if a court rules in favor of a complaint raised by a patent grantee. Therefore, the government may force compulsory licensing and is never actually a patent infringer. This is not to say that the patent grantee has no remedy against the government. Rather, 28 U.S.C. §1498 waives sovereign immunity and establishes the process by which an inventor can claim royalties. At the end of the day, however, the government''s brief reminds us that patents are not granted for inventors to aggrandize their wealth but rather in the interest of society as represented by the sovereign.Bayh-Dole, of course, is a manifestation of this principle. Having entrusted universities with public funds for research, the sovereign then gives universities the right to patent and license the fruits of that research. The intent is not to further fill the university''s coffers with more money but to fill society''s coffers with new products. In other words, under Bayh-Dole, universities are given control over the licensing system specifically to foster the creation of new commercial products for the benefit of society. NPEs, however, muddy the waters.NPEs are individuals or businesses whose core activity involves licensing or litigating patents, rather than making products. NPEs make no products of their own but generate a return by asserting patents against companies that make products.¹⁰ Over the last few years, at least half of all the patent infringement suits filed in the United States have been filed by NPEs.¹¹ Often referred to as patent trolls, many scholars and commentators have argued that NPEs simply create a tax on production—the production of companies already making products. Although one could conceivably argue that they play some role in the innovation system,¹² whatever role they play, NPEs certainly do not make new products. They also do not appear to connect inventors with others who make new products out of their inventions.¹³Traditionally, universities have avoided engaging in widespread patent litigation. For example, a study of 15,000 patent lawsuits filed across four years in the United States found that NPEs filed a majority of those suits.¹⁴ Universities accounted for only one half of one percent of all first-named plaintiffs, making them almost invisible in the dataset.¹⁵Universities have also traditionally avoided partnering with NPEs. In fact, the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) released a public interest statement on ethical technology transfer principles in 2007, which universities could sign. The statement is advisory, not mandatory—setting out guidelines for best practices, rather than requirements. For those universities that signed the statement, the code specified that universities should not operate under a business model that is predicated on infringement litigation rather than commercialization to create products. AUTM, which includes some members who are already licensing technology to NPEs, has decided to reexamine the code.¹⁶ Even if AUTM upholds its original statement, however, it is possible that universities increasingly will license technology to the highest bidder, regardless of whether any new commercial products will result.Money is tempting, and the lure for universities to monetize their patents is becoming irresistible. For example, Intellectual Ventures, one of the largest patent holding companies in the United States and a notorious NPE, claims that it has handled patent licensing for 60 American universities but acknowledges that only two of which (Duke and Caltech) have led to commercial products.¹⁷ Notably, both Duke and Caltech had signed the 2007 AUTM Statement opposing transferring patents to NPEs.¹⁸ In addition, press reports have identified examples of patents funded by federal programs that have been transferred to NPEs.¹⁹ Faced with the incentive to profit from research, at least some universities appear to be shifting away from the policy of avoiding NPEs. As the practice spreads, there is a significant risk that more and more universities will be rushing into the waiting arms of NPEs. In this case, universities may end up fueling the type of litigation that hindered Alzheimer''s researchers, as chronicled in ‘The Mouse that Trolled’.Moreover, these new university commercialization methods may have particularly serious consequences for the life science industry. Many people wrongly believe that biotechnology and the pharmaceutical industry are immune to NPE litigation. However, a study of the patent holdings in the fiscal year 2011 of five universities (the University of California system, MIT, the University of Texas system, Caltech, and the University of South Florida) identified numerous patents that could be deployed with the same techniques that patent trolls have used in the technology sector. These included patents on active ingredients of existing drugs, methods of treatment, screening methods to identify new drugs, manufacturing methods, dosage forms, as well as related technologies.²⁰If universities continue to move toward interactions with NPEs, such portfolios will provide tempting morsels to feed the patent trolling appetite, and could help drive patent trolling more toward the life sciences, a result that cannot be good for life science innovation. It would be troubling if taxpayer money that flows to universities ends up fueling patent trolling, rather than encouraging the creation of new products. In that case, the implicit agreement between the public and the research it funds would be disrupted.‘The Mouse that Trolled: The Long and Tortuous History of A Gene Mutation Patent That Became an Expensive Impediment to Alzheimer''s Research’ tells the cautionary tale of the ways in which NPEs, through patent assertion, hinder progress that affects the public. It is clear, however, that there will be similar examples in the future. The authors’ tale not only casts doubt on the NPE model; it should also make us think deeply about the role that the public expects universities to play in society. The public interest requires that universities act responsibly with public funding and remain dedicated to society''s benefit. University patent monetization via NPEs both fails the spirit of Bayh-Dole and damages the public''s trust.     

Digital provenance – interpretation,verification and corroboration

This paper defines the attributes that are required to provide ‘good’ provenance. The various sources that may be used to verify the provenance of digital information during the investigation of a Microsoft^® Windows^® based computer system are presented. This paper shows how provenance can be corroborated by artefacts which indicate how a computer system was connected to the outside world and the capabilities that it provided to a user. Finally consideration is given to a number of commonly used forensic tools and shows how they represent the provenance of information to an investigator.     

Account-making and confiding as acts of meaning in response to sexual assault

A study was conducted to compare the interpretive and coping responses of female and male survivors of incest and female survivors of sexual assault by a nonrelative. Twenty-eight persons responded to a questionnaire that asked them to provide an account of the nature of an assault(s), the role of confidants in helping them cope with the assault, how they coped and tried to understand the assault over time, how they felt the assault affected their close relationships, and how they evaluated their current state of recovery. The results for male and female incest groups were similar in revealing great difficulty in coping and in having adult close relationships. These two groups showed more continuing lack of resolution than did the female nonfamilial survivors. The male group of incest survivors showed the greatest overall difficulty. The findings are discussed in terms of the roles of searching for meaning via account-making and confiding as ways of dealing with long-term, major Stressors in people's lives.     

Considerations on the economic effect of the new Turkish commercial code provisions regarding single member companies

This article deals with both legal and economic analysis of the new Turkish Commercial Code provisions regarding single member companies. In this respect, legal provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code are examined and compared not only with the Twelfth European Union Directive and Societas Unius Personae, but also regulations of the European Union member states. Since single member companies are to be established as limited liability companies under Turkish law, this article considers the benefits of the limited liability form that can be applied to single member companies in the framework of firm theory. It also examines the benefits and risks of single member companies in terms of transaction costs and assesses the safeguards against the risks in this regard. Finally, an evaluation is made in the light of the data collected relating to the number of companies established after the new Turkish Commercial Code entered into force.     

Social Justice in Love Relationships: Recent Developments

In all societies, people are concerned with justice. “What’s fair is fair!” “She deserves better.” “It’s just not right.” “He can’t get away with that!” “It’s illegal.” “It’s unethical!” “It’s immoral” are fairly common laments. In the 11th century, St. Anselm of Canterbury (Anselem of Canterbury: The major works, 1998) argued that the will possesses two competing inclinations: an affection for what is to a person’s own advantage and an affection for justice; the first inclination is stronger, but the second matters, too. Equity theory, too, posits that in personal relationships, two concerns stand out: firstly, how rewarding are people’s societal, family, and work relationships? Secondly, how fair and equitable are those relationships? According to equity theory, people feel most comfortable when they are getting exactly what they deserve from their relationships—no more and certainly no less. In this article, we will begin by describing the classic equity paradigm and the supporting research. We will then recount the great debate that arose in the wake of the assertion that even in close, loving, intimate relationships, fairness matters. We will end by describing what scientists have learned in the past 35 years about the competing claims of altruism, reward, and fairness in love relationships.     

A psychometric comparison of internet and non-internet sex offenders from a community treatment sample

Abstract

This paper compares psychometric test assessments of 39 men convicted of internet sex offences with 39 convicted of contact offences against a specific victim. Higher rates of socially desirable responding were identified in the internet group, as well as higher rates of emotional loneliness and under assertiveness, although the latter two findings were not statistically significant. This group also achieved lower scores measuring external locus of control, which might reflect their generally higher levels of education and employment (identified from research carried out in tandem with this work). The internet group achieved lower scores on sexualized attitudes towards children, emotional congruence with children and empathy distortions with regard to victims of child abuse. Hence, although they exhibited the kinds of general personality problems exhibited by other sex offenders, they did not support attitudes that explicitly endorse or condone the sexual abuse of children. This paper presents some hypotheses about these results and identifies further research necessary to develop understanding about this new kind of sexually abusive behaviour.     

Privacy,anonymity and liability: Will anonymous communicators have the last laugh?

In this paper, the author sets out the way in which the UK approach to privacy protection is able to extend its reach to anonymous postings. Whilst anonymity might sometimes be seen as one of the essential characteristics of communicating on-line, it does not provide an impenetrable veil of protection in respect of a privacy violation claim. Instead, there are avenues available to identify anonymous communicators, which have implications both for internet freedom and jurisdiction in cyberspace. In the UK, our common law has not denied bloggers, or other on-line contributors, anonymity per se. However, it will be argued that recent UK judgments represent a warning to anonymous communicators that they can be held liable for what they post on-line and that naivety is no defence at law. Whilst on-line platforms allow people to effectively become journalists; to become publishers, as familiar users, they should become more aware of the consequences of their on-line postings and appreciate that they will not be able to escape from the application of third party disclosure orders. However, as these are not without their problems, it is possible that anonymous communicators may have the last laugh.     

Technology transfer practice in japanese corporations: Meeting new service requirements

Japanese corporations are undergoing radical transition: they have begun to reassess the role, organization, and management of their internal R&D and technology commercialization activities in response to changing market, business, and technical conditions. From large consumer electronics firms such as Matsushita and Sony to the semiconductor and computing conglomerates such as Fujitsu and NEC, these organizations are under considerable pressure to both invent and innovate more rapidly and cheaply than ever before. As technologies become more complex and integrated—such as the convergence of electronics, computing, video, and broadcast television—it is no longer practical to assume that all of a firm's R&D needs can be met internally. This paper looks first at how major Japanese corporations have embraced technology transfer mechanisms such as licensing, joint collaboration, and the outsourcing of R&D to manage these changes dynamically and effectively. Secondly, this paper looks at why Japanese firms' record of managing collaboration and licensing, particularly on an international basis, has been disappointing because of a number of problems and barriers. These difficulties, which are compounded by the further externalization of research and technology and by increased licensing activity, have given rise to a need for new technology transfer services which, until recently, have not been available either within the organization or through local consulting firms in Japan. This paper concludes by outlining strategic and operational guidelines for managing licensing and collaboration arrangements between U.S. and Japanese firms which are also applicable in the general case. These insights are based on the experiences of managing licensing and collaboration programs between Japanese and U.S. organizations from the dual perspectives of two licensing firms—Innovation Partners, kk. in Japan and Competitive Technologies, Inc. of the United States.     

Law enforcement access to personal data originally collected by private parties: Missing data subjects' safeguards in directive 2016/680?

Access by law enforcement authorities to personal data initially collected by private parties for commercial or operational purposes is very common, as shown by the transparency reports of new technology companies on law enforcement requests. From a data protection perspective, the scenario of law enforcement access is not necessarily well taken into account. The adoption of the new data protection framework offers the opportunity to assess whether the new ‘police’ Directive, which regulates the processing of personal data for law enforcement purposes, offers sufficient safeguards to individuals. To make this assessment, provisions contained in Directive 2016/680 are tested against the standards established by the ECJ in Digital Rights Ireland and Tele2 Sverige on the retention of data and their further access and use by police authorities. The analysis reveals that Directive 2016/680 does not contain the safeguards identified in the case law. The paper further assesses the role and efficiency of the principle of purpose limitation as a safeguard against repurposing in a law enforcement context. Last, solutions to overcome the shortcomings of Directive 2016/680 are examined in conclusion.     

Validation of benzodiazepine β-glucuronide primary reference materials for hydrolysis and quality assurance controls

The major metabolite of hydroxylated benzodiazepines is the β-glucuronide metabolite, thus a hydrolysis step is included in benzodiazepine analyses in urine. We evaluated the new Alltech (R,S) oxazepam and lorazepam β-glucuronide primary reference materials as hydrolysis controls and for use in proficiency testing. Using HPLC analysis and GC/MS analysis following acid and β-glucuronidase hydrolysis, we found that the lorazepam β-glucuronide material was >95% pure, but the oxazepam β-glucuronide material was only 54.0% pure. Recovery after hydrolysis with β-glucuronidase at 60 °C for two hours and 22 °C for 24 h was compared. There was no difference in the recovery of either drug incubated under both conditions. Using HPLC analysis to separate the R and S isomers of the glucuronides, we found that the S isomer hydrolyzes faster than the R isomer, but at optimal conditions hydrolysis of both isomers is complete. Alltech's glucuronide materials can be valuable as hydrolysis controls in method development and routine benzodiazepine analyses, but each laboratory must validate the purity of the materials and determine the acceptable references ranges for in-house controls made from these materials. The reference materials were also evaluated for possible use as quality control material for urine drug screening. The material had to be added at 130% of the reported cutoff concentration to produce a positive result on the Triage^™ Panel for Drugs of Abuse. For the Triage^™ Plus TCA Panel for Drugs of Abuse lorazepam β-glucuronide was added at 154% of the cutoff concentration, but addition of the oxazepam β-glucuronide at >200% of the reported cutoff concentration did not produce a positive result. Discrepancies may be due to preferential binding of antibodies to the S isomer, because the Alltech glucuronide materials do not contain the isomers in the same ratio as that excreted in human urine.