Company: HURA
Filing Date: 2025-05-06
Form Type: S-4/A
Source: 0001193125-25-113920
Chunk: 268

Company: TuHURA Biosciences, Inc./NV
Filing Date: 2025-05-06
Form: S-4/A
Chunk 268
---
 standard in these USPTO post-grant proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate Kineta’s patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of Kineta’s patent applications and the enforcement or defense of Kineta’s issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on Kineta’s business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before Kineta files an application covering the same invention, could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of Kineta’s even if Kineta had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require Kineta to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application, but circumstances could prevent Kineta from promptly filing patent applications on its inventions. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, Kineta cannot be certain that it or its licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to Kineta’s product candidates and other proprietary technologies Kineta may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in Kineta’s or its licensor’s patents or patent applications. Even where Kineta has a valid and enforceable patent, Kineta may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before Kineta’s filing date. Thus the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of Kineta’s patent applications and the enforcement or defense of Kineta’s issued