2Joint Collaboration Patents Sample Clauses
2Joint Collaboration Patents. Seagen shall have the first right, but not the obligation, to Prosecute and Maintain the Joint Collaboration Patents in both Parties’ names, and the Parties shall share [***] the costs for such Prosecution and Maintenance. The Party handling the Prosecution and Maintenance of a given Joint Collaboration Patent shall, through the Patent Committee, keep the other Party reasonably informed of the status of such Joint Collaboration Patent and shall provide the Patent Committee with (a) copies of all correspondence received from any patent authority in connection with the Prosecution and Maintenance of the Joint Collaboration Patent, and (b) drafts of any filings or responses to be made to patent authorities in advance of submitting such filings or responses so as to allow for a reasonable opportunity for the other Party to review and comment thereon. The prosecuting Party shall incorporate the other Party’s reasonable comments in good faith. The prosecuting Party shall notify the other Party of its intention to suspend or cease the Prosecution and Maintenance of any Joint Collaboration Patent and in such event, the other Party, at its discretion and at its sole expense, shall have the right to continue Prosecution and Maintenance of such Joint Collaboration Patent in both Parties’ names, subject to the foregoing information sharing obligation and review and comment rights.
2Joint Collaboration Patents. With respect to any Joint Collaboration Patent that (a) the IP Committee provides input that such Joint Collaboration Patent relates solely to a given Program and (b) the JSC in good faith agrees unanimously with such input, the Responsible Party for such Program shall thereafter have the right to undertake the Prosecution and Maintenance of such Joint Collaboration Patent. With respect to any Joint Collaboration Patent that (i) covers any Joint Collaboration Know-How that is created, conceived, discovered, generated, invented, made or reduced to practice as a result of the performance of a Research Program (prior to either Party exercising or declining its Opt-In Rights for an Evaluated Bispecific Antibody thereunder pursuant to Section 5.1.1), or (ii) the JSC does not in good faith unanimously agree that such Joint Collaboration Patent relates solely to a given Program, the IP Committee shall determine in good faith which Party shall control the Prosecution and Maintenance of such Joint Collaboration Patent; provided that, in the event of a disagreement between the Parties’ representatives on the IP Committee, such dispute shall be [*]. Any expenses incurred in connection with the Prosecution and Maintenance of a Joint Collaboration Patent shall be (A) [*] if incurred by a Party under the Research Program in connection with such Prosecution and Maintenance in the [*], (B) [*] if incurred by such Party under the Research Program in connection with such Prosecution and Maintenance [*], (C) [*] if incurred by a Lead Party under a Joint Program in connection with such Prosecution and Maintenance [*], (D) [*] if incurred by such Lead Party under a Joint Program in connection with such Prosecution and Maintenance [*], and (E) [*] if incurred by such Unilateral Party under a Unilateral Program. Notwithstanding the foregoing, (A) Xencor will not (1) file a terminal disclaimer with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) that includes an Atreca Patent or (2) make any statements to the USPTO to disqualify an Atreca Patent as prior art under U.S.C. § 102(c) without first obtaining the written consent of Atreca; and (B) Atreca will not (1) file a terminal disclaimer with the USPTO that includes a Xencor Patent or (2) make any statements to the USPTO to disqualify a Xencor Patent as prior art under U.S.C. § 102(c) without first obtaining the written consent of Xencor. The Party having the right to Prosecute and Maintain a Joint Collaboration P...