European Patents with Unitary Effect and Jurisdiction of European Unified Patent Court Sample Clauses

European Patents with Unitary Effect and Jurisdiction of European Unified Patent Court. OPKO shall have the exclusive right, but not the obligation, to determine in relation to the OPKO Prosecuted IP whether any Patent Right sought in Europe shall be obtained as a national patent of a European state, or as a European patent with unitary effect, including whether to validate a European patent as a national patent or a patent with unitary effect. Where OPKO has the first or sole right to enforce any Patent Right under this Agreement, unless such right to enforce has passed to Pfizer, OPKO shall have the sole right, at any relevant time in the prosecution or enforcement of such Patent Right, to determine whether to subject such Patent Right to the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court, including with respect to any infringement or nullity action, and with respect to any decision whether to opt-in or opt-out of such jurisdiction. OPKO and Pfizer shall cooperate in connection with all such activities, taking such action in Pfizer’s name if so required. OPKO, its agents and attorneys will give due consideration to all suggestions and comments of Pfizer regarding such
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
European Patents with Unitary Effect and Jurisdiction of European Unified Patent Court. OPKO shall have the exclusive right, but not the obligation, to determine in relation to the OPKO Prosecuted IP whether any Patent Right sought in Europe shall be obtained as a national patent of a European state, or as a European patent with unitary effect, including whether to validate a European patent as a national patent or a patent with unitary effect. Where OPKO has the first or sole right to enforce any Patent Right under this Agreement, unless such right to enforce has passed to Pfizer, OPKO shall have the sole right, at any relevant time in the prosecution or enforcement of such Patent Right, to determine whether to subject such Patent Right to the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court, including with respect to any infringement or nullity action, and with respect to any decision *** = Portions of this exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment. An unredacted version of this exhibit has been filed separately with the Commission. whether to opt-in or opt-out of such jurisdiction. OPKO and Pfizer shall cooperate in connection with all such activities, taking such action in Pfizer’s name if so required. OPKO, its agents and attorneys will give due consideration to all suggestions and comments of Pfizer regarding such determinations, but in the event of a disagreement between the Parties, OPKO shall have the final decision-making authority.
Sample 1

Related to European Patents with Unitary Effect and Jurisdiction of European Unified Patent Court

  • Enforcement of Licensed Patents Each party shall promptly notify the other in writing of any alleged or threatened infringement of any Patent included in the Licensed Patents of which such party becomes aware.

  • Patents and Patent Applications To the Company’s knowledge, all patents and patent applications owned by or licensed to the Company or under which the Company has rights have been duly and properly filed and maintained; to the knowledge of the Company, the parties prosecuting such applications have complied with their duty of candor and disclosure to the USPTO in connection with such applications; and the Company is not aware of any facts required to be disclosed to the USPTO that were not disclosed to the USPTO and which could reasonably be expected to preclude the grant of a patent in connection with any such application or could reasonably be expected to form the basis of a finding of invalidity with respect to any patents that have issued with respect to such applications.

  • INFRINGEMENT AND PATENT ENFORCEMENT 11.1 PHS and Licensee agree to notify each other promptly of each infringement or possible infringement of the Licensed Patent Rights, as well as, any facts which may affect the validity, scope, or enforceability of the Licensed Patent Rights of which either party becomes aware.

  • Prosecution of Patent Applications At its own expense, each Assignor shall diligently prosecute all material applications for (i) United States Patents listed in Annex F hereto and (ii) Copyrights listed on Annex G hereto, in each case for such Assignor and shall not abandon any such application prior to exhaustion of all administrative and judicial remedies (other than applications deemed by such Assignor to be no longer prudent to pursue), absent written consent of the Collateral Agent.

  • Patent and Trademark Disputes Notwithstanding Section 16.2, any dispute, controversy or claim relating to the inventorship, scope, validity, enforceability or infringement of any Patents or Marks Covering the manufacture, use, importation, offer for sale or sale of Products shall be submitted to a court of competent jurisdiction in the country in which such patent or trademark rights were granted or arose.

  • Patent Applications It is understood by the parties that, pursuant to the Baylor Technology Transfer Agreement, MAS has the initial responsibility for filing, prosecution and maintenance of Patents and Patent Applications covering the Baylor Technology. The parties agree that, as between MAS and CTI, MAS shall be responsible for deciding whether and how to file, prosecute and maintain the Patents and Patent Applications, provided that:

  • Covenants Regarding Patent, Trademark and Copyright Collateral (a) Each Grantor agrees that it will not, nor will it permit any of its licensees to, do any act, or omit to do any act, whereby any Patent which is material to the conduct of such Grantor's business may become invalidated or dedicated to the public, and agrees that it shall continue to xxxx any products covered by a Patent with the relevant patent number as necessary and sufficient to establish and preserve its maximum rights under applicable patent laws.

  • Filing of Patent Applications Each Party will make timely decisions regarding the filing of Patent Applications on the CRADA Subject Inventions made solely by its employee(s), and will notify the other Party in advance of filing. Collaborator will have the first opportunity to file a Patent Application on joint CRADA Subject Inventions and will notify PHS of its decision within sixty (60) days of an Invention being reported or at least thirty (30) days before any patent filing deadline, whichever occurs sooner. If Collaborator fails to notify PHS of its decision within that time period or notifies PHS of its decision not to file a Patent Application, then PHS has the right to file a Patent Application on the joint CRADA Subject Invention. Neither Party will be obligated to file a Patent Application. Collaborator will place the following statement in any Patent Application it files on a CRADA Subject Invention: “This invention was created in the performance of a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement with the National Institutes of Health, an Agency of the Department of Health and Human Services. The Government of the United States has certain rights in this invention.” If either Party files a Patent Application on a joint CRADA Subject Invention, then the filing Party will include a statement within the Patent Application that clearly identifies the Parties and states that the joint CRADA Subject Invention was made under this CRADA.

  • Joint Patents Neither Party shall have any obligation to file or prosecute any Joint Patent. To the extent a Party wishes to prosecute a Joint Patent, the Parties will mutually agree upon which Party will have the first right to prosecute such Joint Patent, based on the contribution of each Party to such invention and each Party’s potential interest in products based upon such invention. If the Party having such first right does not wish to prosecute such Joint Patent, it shall inform the other Party promptly, but in any event no later than [***] after the Parties have agreed upon which Party had the first right to prosecute such Joint Patent. If the Party having such first right does not wish to prosecute such Joint Patent, the other Party may, upon written notice to such Party, prosecute such Joint Patent. The Party that prosecutes a Joint Patent pursuant to this Section 5.2(b) (the “prosecuting Party”) will solely bear its own internal costs for such prosecution and will solely bear the external costs for such prosecution (e.g., outside counsel, filing fees, etc.). Licensee will have the first right, but not the obligation, to prosecute infringement of any Joint Patents that is related to the Exclusively Licensed Know-How or a product competitive, or potentially competitive, with a Licensed Product; and Licensor will have the first right, but not the obligation, to prosecute infringement of any Joint Patents in all other cases. The Parties shall first confer and mutually agree regarding any such prosecution of infringement; provided, however, that Licensee shall have the right, without the consent of Licensor, to assert a Joint Patent against a Third Party in a defense of or counterclaim to any claim or assertion of infringement of a Patent or misappropriation of Know-How Controlled by such Third Party.

  • Patent Matters 4.1 Licensor shall have the right, but not the obligation, to prosecute and maintain all Patents to be issued pertaining to the Patent applications licensed in Exhibit A at its cost and expense. Licensor shall keep licensee reasonably apprised of all relevant actions regarding the status of such patents.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.