Following an increase in the number of new trademark applications in China and the tightening of examination standards for letters of consent by the CNIPA and the courts, non-use cancellation has become one of the most popular tools for removing prior mark obstacles.
According to CNIPA data, the number of review decisions on non-use cancellation rose from 14,866 in 2022 to 16,438 in 2023 and 18,693 in 2024. The surge in review cases indicates an even larger increase in first-stage cancellation applications.
Last year, the CNIPA introduced new examination requirements and practices concerning non-use cancellation.
Key changes in examination practice
Although the Chinese Trademark Law does not set evidentiary requirements for cancellation petitioners, Article 66 of the Implementing Regulations provides that “[w]here a registered trademark has not been used for three consecutive years and there is no justified reason under Article 49 of the Trademark Law, any entity or individual may apply to the Trademark Office to cancel the registration and shall state the relevant facts” [emphasis added].
This provision allows the CNIPA to demand more detailed “relevant facts” and has led to the following new practices:
Examination of the petitioner’s subjective intention – since the second half of 2024, the CNIPA has issued supplementary notices to petitioners that file a high volume of cancellation actions within a short period, requiring them to explain their motive and furnish supporting evidence.
Stricter preliminary-investigation evidence – from January 2025, petitioners must provide three categories of evidence when submitting a cancellation request:
Basic information on the registrant: business scope, current operating/existence status, and the status of the target mark;
If the registrant is still active, a survey report and evidence of its actual business, such as product sales, service provision, business premises, or office address; and
Search results showing whether the mark has been used on the designated goods/services. The search must cover at least three comprehensive or industry-specific platforms and include full-screen captures of the first five consecutive pages of results.
These requirements shift part of the evidentiary burden from the registrant (which traditionally bore the main burden of proving use) to the petitioner.
In the proposed amendments to the Trademark Examination and Review Guidelines of the CNIPA, formal requirements for non-use cancellation include mandatory preliminary evidence on the registrant’s existence, actual business status, and use (or non-use) of the mark.
Impact on registrants and petitioners
By raising the evidentiary threshold for petitioners and fine-tuning procedures, the CNIPA aims to reduce malicious cancellations. Trademark right holders will face fewer groundless attacks but, when challenged, must still provide genuine, relevant evidence of use. Owners are therefore advised to maintain and regularly update records of trademark use (invoices, advertising, packaging, online listings, etc.) to ensure an effective defence.
Petitioners should closely monitor the new filing requirements and ensure all preliminary evidence is included. Non-use cancellations must be based on legitimate commercial needs and filed in good faith.
Trademark owners and potential cancellation petitioners are advised to adapt their portfolio management and enforcement strategies to align with these evolving practices.
