Protagonist Therapeutics (PTGX) Risk Analysis

We rely upon a combination of patent protection, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our product candidates and technologies. The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. We may or may not file or prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications. The patent applications that we own or license may fail to result in issued patents in the United States or in other foreign countries, or they may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates or technologies in the United States or in other foreign countries. Any failure to identify relevant prior art relating to a patent or patent applications can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing. Even if patents have been issued, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patent and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product candidates and technologies, or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents is challenged, or if they fail to provide meaningful exclusivity for our product candidates, it could prevent us from asserting exclusivity over the covered product and allow generic competition. We cannot offer any assurances about which, if any, of our patent applications will issue, the breadth of any such issued patent, or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened by third parties. Any successful opposition or other challenge to our patents or patent applications could significantly diminish the commercial prospects of any products that we develop. In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States and in many other countries, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed, and once any patents covering a product expire, generic competitors may enter the market. Our granted U.S. patent covering rusfertide expires in 2034 but is eligible for extension of up to five years for a portion of the time spent in development. Although the life of a patent can be increased based on certain delays caused by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, this increase can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. If we encounter delays in our clinical trials or in gaining regulatory approval, the period of time during which we could market any of our product candidates under patent protection, if approved, would be reduced. We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world. Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our product candidates throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States may be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights, including trade secrets, to the same extent as federal and state laws of the United States and many countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government agencies or government contractors. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as in the United States. These products may compete with our products in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued patents and our patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from so competing. Also, if our trade secrets are disclosed in a foreign jurisdiction, competitors worldwide could have access to our proprietary information and we may be without satisfactory recourse. Such disclosure could have a material adverse effect on our business. We also rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary scientific, business and technical information and know-how that is not or may not be patentable or that we elect not to patent. For example, we primarily rely on trade secrets and confidentiality agreements to protect our peptide therapeutics technology platform. Any disclosure to or misappropriation by third parties of our confidential proprietary information could enable competitors to quickly duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets and proprietary know-how or if competitors independently develop viable competing products, our business and competitive position may be harmed. Although we require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and endeavor to execute confidentiality agreements with all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how and other confidential information related to such technology, we cannot be certain that we have executed such agreements with all third parties who may have helped to develop our intellectual property or who had access to our proprietary information, nor can be we certain that our agreements will not be breached. If any of the parties to these confidentiality agreements breaches or violates the terms of such agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation, and we could lose our trade secrets as a result. Even if we are able to adequately protect our trade secrets and proprietary information, our trade secrets could otherwise become known or could be independently discovered by our competitors. If our trade secrets are not adequately protected so as to protect our market against competitors' products, others may be able to exploit our proprietary peptide product candidate discovery technologies to identify and develop competing product candidates, and thus our competitive position could be adversely affected, as could our business.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business. The following examples are illustrative: - others may be able to make compounds or formulations that are similar to our product candidates, but that are not covered by the claims of any patents that we own, license or control;- we or any strategic partners might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patents or pending patent applications that we own;- we may not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions;- others may independently develop the same, similar, or alternative technologies without infringing, misappropriating or violating our intellectual property rights;- it is possible that our pending patent applications will not lead to issued patents;- issued patents may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or may be narrowed or held invalid or unenforceable, including as a result of legal challenges;- our competitors might conduct research and development activities in the United States and other countries that provide a safe harbor from patent infringement claims for certain research and development activities, as well as in countries where we do not have patent rights, and may then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets;- we may choose not to file a patent in order to maintain certain trade secrets or know-how, and a third party may subsequently file a patent covering such trade secrets or know-how; and - the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business. Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse impact on our business and financial condition.

Because we expect to rely on third parties in the development and manufacture of our product candidates, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor's discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an ownership interest in our issued patents, any patents issued as a result of our pending or future applications or other intellectual property. We have had in the past, and we may have in the future, ownership disputes arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates and technologies. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims. In addition, some of our intellectual property rights were generated through the use of U.S. government funding and are therefore subject to certain federal regulations. As a result, the U.S. government may have certain rights to intellectual property embodied in our current or future product candidates pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and implementing regulations. These U.S. government rights in certain inventions developed under a government-funded program include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right to require us or our licensors to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party in certain circumstances (also referred to as "march-in rights").

Many of our employees and consultants, including our senior management and our scientific founders, have been employed or retained at universities or by other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including potential competitors. Some of our employees and consultants, including each member of our senior management and each of our scientific founders, executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment or retention. We may be subject to claims that we or these employees, consultants or independent contractors have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such employee's or consultant's former or other employer. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our drug candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing or otherwise violating the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. Numerous third-party U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates, and there may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates and technologies. Third parties may initiate legal proceedings against us alleging that we are infringing or otherwise violating their patent or other intellectual property rights. Given the vast number of patents in our field of technology, marketing of our product candidates or practice of our technologies could infringe existing patents or patents granted in the future. There may be applications now pending of which we are unaware that may later result in issued patents that may be infringed by the practice of our peptide therapeutics technology platform or the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates. If any third-party patents were to be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product or formulation itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. As our industry expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates or technologies may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to commercialize our product candidates. Even if we are successful in defending against any infringement claims, litigation is expensive and time-consuming and is likely to divert management's attention and substantial resources from our core business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, limit our uses, pay royalties or redesign our infringing product candidates, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We may choose to seek, or may be required to seek, a license from the third-party patent holder and would most likely be required to pay license fees or royalties or both, each of which could be substantial. These licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, however, or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, the rights we obtain may be nonexclusive, which would provide our competitors access to the same intellectual property rights upon which we are forced to rely. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates, and we have done so from time to time. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In such an event, we would be unable to further practice our technologies or develop and commercialize any of our product candidates at issue, which could harm our business significantly.

As more groups become engaged in scientific research and product development in fields related to our product candidates, such as hepcidin mimetics or IL-23R, the risk of our patents, or patents that we have in-licensed, being challenged through patent interferences, derivation proceedings, oppositions, re-examinations, litigation or other means will likely increase. An adverse outcome in a patent dispute could have a material adverse effect on our business by: - causing us to lose patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction(s);- subjecting our collaboration partners or us to litigation, or otherwise preventing the commercialization of product candidates in the relevant jurisdiction(s); or - requiring our collaboration partners or us to obtain licenses to the disputed patents, cease using the disputed technology or develop or obtain alternative technologies. An adverse outcome in a patent dispute could severely harm our collaborations or cause our collaboration partners to terminate their respective agreements. Litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims, with or without merit, are unpredictable and generally expensive and time-consuming and, even if resolved in our favor, are likely to divert significant resources from our core business, including distracting our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating or from successfully challenging our intellectual property rights. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.