Why intellectual property audits are make or break for businesses, according to Houston expert

guest column

A thorough IP audit separates the wheat from the chaff. Image via Getty Images

Every company with a business based in whole or in part on important intellectual property should protect that property with regularly scheduled intellectual property “audits.” Failing to do so may not only endanger valuable, company-owned patents and trademarks, but also make the business less profitable than it could be.

An IP audit is especially critical when a business is being sold, when a company is planning to buy another business, when a patent is being challenged by a competitor, when a company is looking for new financing or going public, and when there is a change in top management or employees in critical positions have left. A regularly scheduled IP audit can prevent panic, confusion and unwelcome surprises when these major events occur, because management will already have a good working knowledge of the status of all intellectual property.

To begin with, a thorough audit separates the wheat from the chaff. Which patents are central to the company’s business and must be carefully maintained in force? Are there other patents that are no longer important or have been superseded by newer developments and can safely be ignored and allowed to lapse?

Patents should be filed wherever the company’s products are sold and fees on all important patents must be carefully kept up to date. Fees to maintain international patents are often especially expensive but should be updated when necessary, nonetheless. Sometimes, when a company’s trademarks are reviewed, management learns that they have never been federally registered.

Auditors also may find that existing patents are no longer adequate to protect the products that are actually being sold. The products may have “moved on” through further development or application to new uses, but the relevant patents have not. Those patents should be updated immediately with new filings. It’s also critical to determine whether the products made and sold by the company could possibly infringe patents held by competitors—or whether the reverse is true, that other companies’ products are infringing the patents held by the company being audited.

A careful examination of intellectual property can also result in positive developments: auditors may discover that some patents are more valuable than anyone knew and can be licensed to produce another revenue stream for the company—or licensing can be expanded beyond the present level.

Beyond the focus on patents and trademarks, an IP audit should entail a close examination of all contracts and agreements relating to intellectual property. Pinning down exactly who owns the property is just as important as keeping patents up to date. This entails delving into development agreements, nondisclosure agreements, employment agreements, work-for-hire and sales contracts, to make sure ownership of a company’s intellectual property has not been ceded to, or shared with, a third party.

Software is particularly problematic when it comes to inadvertent infringement of the rights of others. What software is being used internally? Where did it come from and what are the limitations on its use? IT professionals don’t always realize that even open-source code requires a license.

This entire process also needs to be applied to analyzing the intellectual property of a prospective acquisition. Investigators may discover that patents belonging to the acquisition are not all appropriate for the acquiring company’s products, fees are not up to date or there are issues with IP ownership or validity. All of these factors may result in substantial savings on the purchase—or a decision not to purchase at all.

------

Puja Detjen is an intellectual property attorney and partner in the Houston office of Patterson + Sheridan.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

NASA revamps Artemis moon landing program by modeling it after Apollo

To the moon

NASA is revamping its Artemis moon exploration program to make it more like the fast-paced Apollo program half a century ago, adding an extra practice flight before attempting a high-risk lunar landing with a crew in two years.

The overhaul in the flight lineup came just days after NASA’s new moon rocket returned to its hangar for more repairs, and a safety panel warned the space agency to scale back its overly ambitious goals for humanity’s first lunar landing since 1972.

Artemis II, a lunar fly-around by four astronauts, is off until at least April because of rocket problems.

The follow-up mission, Artemis III, had been targeting a landing near the moon’s south pole by another pair of astronauts in about three years. But with long gaps between flights and concern growing over the readiness of a lunar lander and moonwalking suits, NASA’s new administrator Jared Isaacman announced that mission would instead focus on launching a lunar lander into orbit around Earth in 2027 for docking practice by astronauts flying in an Orion capsule.

The new plan calls for a moon landing — potentially even two moon landings — by astronauts in 2028.

“Everybody agrees. This is the only way forward,” Isaacman said.

The hydrogen fuel leaks and helium flow problems that struck the Space Launch System rocket on the pad at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in February also plagued the first Artemis test flight without a crew in 2022.

Another three-year gap was looming between Artemis II and the moon landing by astronauts as originally envisioned, Isaacman said.

Isaacman stressed that “it should be incredibly obvious” that three years between flights is unacceptable. He'd like to get it down to one year or even less.

Isaacman, a tech billionaire who bought his own trips to orbit and performed the world’s first private spacewalk, took the helm at NASA in December.

During NASA’s storied Apollo program, he said, astronauts’ first flight to the moon was followed by two more missions before Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the moon. What's more, he added, the Apollo moonshots followed one another in quick succession, just as the earlier Projects Mercury and Gemini had rapid flight rates, sometimes coming just a few months apart.

Twenty-four Apollo astronauts flew to the moon from 1968 through 1972, with 12 of them landing.

“No one at NASA forgot their history books. They knew how to do this," Isaacman said. “Now we're putting it in action.”

To pick up the pace and reduce risk, NASA will standardize its Space Launch System rockets moving forward, Isaacman said. These are the massive rockets that will launch astronauts to the moon aboard Orion capsules. At the same time, Elon Musk's SpaceX and Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin are speeding up their work on the landers needed to get the astronauts from lunar orbit down to the surface.

Isaacman said next year will see an Orion crew rendezvousing in orbit around Earth with SpaceX's Starship, Blue Origin's Blue Moon or both landers. It's similar to the methodical approach that worked so well during Apollo in the late 1960s, he noted. Apollo 8, astronauts' first flight to the moon, was followed by two more missions before Armstrong and Aldrin aimed for the lunar surface.

“We should be getting back to basics and doing what we know works,” he said.

The Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel recommended that NASA revise its objectives for Artemis III “given the demanding mission goals.” It’s urgent the space agency do that, the panel said, if the United States hopes to safely return astronauts to the moon. Isaacman said the revised Artemis flight plan addresses the panel's concerns and is supported by industry and the Trump administration.

Booming Houston suburb launches innovation grant to attract startups

innovation incentive

Think you’ve got a burgeoning startup? Consider moving it to southwest Houston. The City of Sugar Land announced the Sugar Land Starts Innovation Fund last week to support companies that move jobs to the area.

“The Sugar Land Starts Innovation Fund is designed to support companies that are ready to grow and make a meaningful, long-term commitment to our community,” Colby Millenbruch, business recruitment manager for the City of Sugar Land, said in a news release. “By focusing on revenue-generating startups and performance-based incentives, we are creating a clear pathway for innovative companies to scale while reenergizing existing office space.”

The performance-based, non-equity dilutive grant program is open to companies that demonstrate at least $250,000 in generated revenue or $500,000 in institutional backing from a bank or venture capital firm. They must commit to hiring or relocating at least three employees in Sugar Land for a minimum of three years and at an average salary of $61,240. Compliance will be verified through Texas Workforce Commission reporting.

The fund builds off the Sugar Land Plug and Play partnership to turn the city into an innovative technology hub.

Collaboration with the Silicon Valley-based startup incubator and accelerator on a physical location in southwest Houston has supported 22 startups and has raised $6.5 million in capital since it officially launched in Sugar Land last March. Companies located at the Sugar Land Plug and Play include Synaps, a browser-based design platform for architects, and Intero Biosystems, which produces miniature human organs for preclinical drug development.

In addition to direct funding and business space, both the new grant and the overall Plug and Play project facilitate meetings with Houston-area businesses like CenterPoint Energy.

This should not only bring new industries to Sugar Land, but also allow existing companies to expand outward as technological investors to create a web of new progress.

“This investment is about more than technology. It’s about creating an environment where innovation can take root, grow, and deliver lasting value for the Sugar Land community,” David Steele, director of Texas at Plug and Play, added in the release. “Sugar Land is setting itself apart by taking a long-term view, investing in founders, partnerships, and technologies that will define the next chapter of growth. We’re proud to partner with the city in building an innovation ecosystem that benefits both entrepreneurs and the broader community.”

Income study shows $100,000 salary goes further in Houston in 2026

Money Talk

A 2026 income study has good news for big earners in Houston: A six-figure salary goes further than it did last year.

A Houston resident's $100,000 salary is worth $84,840 after taxes and adjusted for the local cost of living, according to the new financial analysis from SmartAsset. That's about $1,500 more than Houstonians were bringing home last year.

The 2026 take-home pay is about 8 percent higher than it was in 2024, when the same salary had an adjusted value of $78,089.

SmartAsset used its paycheck calculator to apply federal, state and local taxes to an annual salary of $100,000 in 69 of the largest American cities. The figure was then adjusted for the local cost of living (which included average costs for housing, groceries, utilities, transportation, and miscellaneous goods and services). Cities were then ranked based on where a six-figure salary is worth the least after applicable taxes and cost of living adjustments.

Houston ranked No. 60 in the overall ranking of U.S. cities where $100,000 is worth the least. If the rankings were flipped and the cities were ranked based on where $100,000 goes the furthest, that places Houston in the No. 10 spot nationwide.

Manhattan, New York remains the No. 1 city where a six-figure salary is worth the least. A Manhattan resident's take-home pay is only worth $29,420 after taxes and adjusted for the cost of living, which is 3.10 percent lower than it was in 2025.

SmartAsset determined Manhattan has a 29.7 percent effective tax rate on six-figure salaries. Meanwhile, the effective tax rate on a $100,000 salary in Texas (based on the eight cities examined in the report) is 21.1 percent. It's worth highlighting that New York implements a statewide graduated-rate income tax from 4-10.90 percent, whereas Texas is one of only eight states that don't tax residents' income.

Oklahoma City, No. 69, is the U.S. city in the report where a $100,000 salary stretches the furthest. A six-figure salary is worth $91,868 in 2026, up from $89,989 last year.

This is the post-tax value of a $100,000 salary in other Texas cities, and their ranking in the report:

  • Plano (No. 27): $72,653
  • Dallas (No. 47): $80,103
  • Austin (No. 53): $82,446
  • Lubbock (No. 59): $84,567
  • San Antonio (No. 62): $86,419
  • El Paso (No. 67): $90,276
  • Corpus Christi (No. 68): $91,110
According to the report, getting some "financial breathing room" by making six-figures really depends on where someone lives and what their lifestyle is. For residents living in the 42 states that levy some amount of income tax, their take-home pay dwindles further."And depending on how taxes are filed, reaching a $100,000 income may push a household from the 22 percent to 24 percent marginal tax bracket," the report's author wrote. "Meanwhile, locations with high costs across housing and everyday essentials may be less forgiving to a $100,000 income."

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

View All Listings