The use of the unchecked block in the code introduces a risk of overflow if the tokensOwed0 and tokensOwed1 values grow too large, especially when fees accumulate over a long period without being collected by the position owner. Although the comment suggests that the fees should be collected to avoid overflow, there is no enforced deadline for the owner to collect them.
If an overflow occurs in the tokensOwed0 or tokensOwed1 calculations, the fees reset to 0, causing the owner to lose accumulated fees. 
Since arithmetic overflow checks are disabled inside the unchecked block, Soliditys default protections do not apply. This makes overflow possible if the position accumulates fees over an extended period without being claimed.
Without a mechanism or deadline to force fee collection, users may forget to claim fees, increasing the risk of overflow and loss of value.
https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-10-ramses-exchange/blob/4a40eba36bc47eba8179d4f6203a4b84561a4415/contracts/CL/periphery/NonfungiblePositionManager.sol#L236C7-L251C10
Consider removing unchecked from position.tokensOwed0 and position.tokensOwed1 blocks.
