Company: NCEL
Filing Date: 2025-05-16
Form Type: 20-F
Source: 0001213900-25-044868
Chunk: 133

Company: NewcelX Ltd.
Filing Date: 2025-05-16
Form: 20-F
Item: Item 3
Chunk 133
---
            

  a court could determine that a competitor’s technology        

  the combined company’s patents could irretrievably lapse                                                           

  if the combined company encounters delays in its development                                                                

Obtaining and maintaining the combined company’s
patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental
patent agencies, and the combined company’s patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for noncompliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees
on any issued patent are due to be paid to the U. S. PTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the term of the patent.
The U. S. PTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment
and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of
a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment
or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance
events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond
to office actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In
such an event, the combined company’s competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect
on its business.

The combined company may not be able to
enforce its intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting and defending
patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and its intellectual property rights
in some countries outside the United States and Israel can be less extensive than those in the United States and Israel. In
addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property to the same extent as laws in the United States
and Israel. Consequently, the combined company may not be able to seek to prevent third parties from practicing its inventions in all
countries outside the

United States and Israel,
or from selling or importing products made using its inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors,
for example, may use the combined company’s technologies in jurisdictions where Kadimastem have not obtained patents to develop
their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where it has patents, but