Company: BNRG
Filing Date: 2025-03-04
Form Type: 20-F
Source: 0001213900-25-020178
Chunk: 22

Company: Brenmiller Energy Ltd.
Filing Date: 2025-03-04
Form: 20-F
Item: Item 3
Chunk 22
---
 could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable.
In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability 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 someone connected with prosecution of the patent
withheld relevant information from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution.
Under the Leahy-Smith Act, the validity of U. S. patents may also be challenged in post-grant proceedings before the USPTO. The outcome
following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable.

Derivation
proceedings initiated by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions and/or their scope with
respect to our patent or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related
technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does
not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful,
may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation
could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our product development, continue our research
programs, license necessary technology from third parties, or enter into development partnerships that would help us bring our new products
or services to market.

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 a material adverse effect on the price of our Ordinary Shares.

We may be subject
to claims challenging the inventorship of our intellectual property.

We
may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in, or right to compensation, with
respect to our current patent and patent applications, future patents, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For
example,