Company: NCEL
Filing Date: 2025-09-10
Form Type: 424B3
Source: 0001213900-25-086600
Chunk: 248

Company: NewcelX Ltd.
Filing Date: 2025-09-10
Form: 424B3
Chunk 248
---
 including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if the combined company is found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent the combined company from commercializing its technology or force the combined company to cease some of its business operations, which could materially harm the combined company’s business. Claims that the combined company has misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on its business. The combined company may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship of its patents and other intellectual property. The combined company may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in its patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co -inventor. For example, the combined company may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing its product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship. If the combined company fails in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, it may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on its business. Even if it is successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. In addition, the combined company may receive less revenue from future products if any of its employees successfully claim for compensation for their work in developing the combined company’s intellectual property, which in turn could impact the combined company’s future profitability. Under applicable employment laws, the combined company may not be able to enforce covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent its competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of its former employees. In addition, employees may be entitled to seek compensation for their inventions irrespective of their agreements with it. The combined company generally enters into non -competitionagreements with its employees and certain key consultants. These agreements prohibit employees and certain key consultants, if they cease working for the combined company, from competing directly with it or working for its competitors or clients for a limited period of time. The combined company may be unable to enforce these agreements under the laws of the jurisdictions in which the combined company’s employees work and it may be difficult for it to restrict its competitors from benefitting from the expertise its former employees or consultants developed while working for it. For example, Israeli courts have required employers seeking to enforce non -competeundertakings of a former employee to demonstrate that the