Company: CNTB
Filing Date: 2025-03-31
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0001835268-25-000014
Chunk: 167

Company: Connect Biopharma Holdings Ltd
Filing Date: 2025-03-31
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1A
Chunk 167
---
ability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant material information from the USPTO, CNIPA or any other applicable patent office, or made a materially misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar validity claims before the USPTO in post-grant proceedings such as ex parte re-examinations, inter partes review, or post-grant review, or oppositions or similar proceedings outside the U.S., in parallel with litigation or even outside the context of litigation. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. We cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. For patents and patent applications that we license in the future, we may have limited or no right to participate in the defense of any licensed patents against challenge by a third party. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of any future patent protection on our current or future Product Candidates. Such a loss of patent protection could harm our business.

We may not be able to detect or prevent, alone or with our licensors, infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the U.S. Any litigation or other proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights may fail, and even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have an adverse effect on the price of our ADSs or ordinary shares. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Derivation, interference or other proceedings may be necessary to determine priority of inventions relating to our current or future Product Candidates, and an unfavorable outcome may require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights from the prevailing party.

66

Derivation