Our success will depend in part upon our ability to obtain patents and maintain adequate protection of the intellectual property related to our technologies and products. The patent positions of biopharmaceutical companies, including our patent position, are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. We will be able to protect our intellectual property rights from unauthorized use by third parties only to the extent that our technologies are covered by valid and enforceable patents or are effectively maintained as trade secrets. We will continue to apply for patents covering our technologies and products as, where and when we deem lawful and appropriate. However, these applications may be challenged or may fail to result in issued patents. Our issued patents have been and may in the future be challenged by third parties as invalid or unenforceable under U.S. or foreign laws, or they may be infringed by third parties, and we are from time to time involved in the defense and enforcement of our patents or other intellectual property rights in a court of law, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office IPR review or reexamination proceeding, foreign opposition proceeding or related legal and administrative proceeding in the U.S. and elsewhere. The costs of defending our patents or enforcing our proprietary rights in post-issuance administrative proceedings and litigation can be substantial and the outcome can be uncertain. An adverse outcome may allow third parties to use our intellectual property without a license and/or allow third parties to introduce generic and other competing products, any of which would negatively impact our business. Third parties may also attempt to invalidate or design around our patents, or assert that they are invalid or otherwise unenforceable, and seek to introduce generic versions of cabozantinib. For example, we received Paragraph IV certification notice letters from MSN, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited, Teva Pharmaceuticals Development, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (individually and collectively referred to as Teva), Cipla, Ltd. and Cipla USA, Inc. (individually and collectively referred to as Cipla) and Sun concerning the respective ANDAs that each had filed with the FDA seeking approval to market their respective generic versions of CABOMETYX tablets. Should MSN, Teva, Cipla, Sun or any other third parties receive FDA approval of an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA with respect to cabozantinib, it is possible that such company or companies could introduce generic versions of our marketed products before our patents expire if they do not infringe our patents or if it is determined that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, and the resulting generic competition could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, third parties may have pending applications, unknown to us, which may later result in issued patents that cover the production, manufacture, commercialization or use of our product candidates. Our existing patents and any future patents we obtain may not be sufficiently broad to prevent others from practicing our technologies or from developing competing products. They may also be negatively impacted by the decisions of foreign courts, which could limit the protection contemplated by the original regulatory approval and our ability to thwart the development of competing products that might otherwise have been determined to infringe our intellectual property rights. Furthermore, others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or design around our patents. In addition, our patents may be challenged or invalidated or may fail to provide us with any competitive advantages, if, for example, others were the first to invent or to file patent applications for closely related inventions.
The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the U.S., and many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending such rights in foreign jurisdictions. Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties and many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of the patent. Moreover, the Russian Federation has and may further limit protections on patents originating from certain countries (including the U.S.) in response to sanctions relating to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, and in general, the legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the aggressive enforcement of patent and other intellectual property protection, which makes it difficult to stop infringement. We also rely on trade secret protection for some of our confidential and proprietary information, and we are taking security measures to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, particularly in light of recent instances of data loss and misappropriation of intellectual property in the biopharmaceutical industry. However, these measures may not provide adequate protection, and while we seek to protect our proprietary information by entering into confidentiality agreements with employees, partners and consultants, as well as maintain cybersecurity protocols within our information technology infrastructure, we cannot provide assurance that our proprietary information will not be disclosed, or that we can meaningfully protect our trade secrets. In addition, our competitors may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information or may otherwise gain access to our trade secrets.