Company: FTII
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form Type: S-4
Source: 0001493152-25-006997
Chunk: 173

Company: FutureTech II Acquisition Corp.
Filing Date: 2025-02-14
Form: S-4
Chunk 173
---
 of, or invalidate or render unenforceable, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize
our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize
products without infringing third-party patent rights if patent rights are awarded to third parties instead of to us. Moreover, we may
have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings,
such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge our priority of invention or other features of patentability with respect
to our patents and patent applications. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims
being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar
or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology or products. Such proceedings also
may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our employees and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable
to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition,
if we initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent we own covering the third party’s competing products,
the defendant could counterclaim that such patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims
alleging invalidity are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements,
including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that inventorship
is incorrect or that a named inventor or someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld material information from the USPTO
or made a misleading statement during prosecution. Third parties may also raise claims challenging the validity of our patents before
administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation, including through re-examination, post-grant
review, inter partes review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g.,
opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of or amendment to our patents in such a way
that they no longer cover our products. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With
respect to the validity question, for example