Until recently, filing a non-use cancellation action against a Chinese trademark was a straightforward process: Applicants only needed to provide a brief use investigation report and proof of legal status to justify their request. As a result, the annual volume of applications steadily increased. Their number has doubled over the past five years.
Since early 2025, the Chinese Office increasingly issues amendment notifications requiring Applicants to submit preliminary non-use evidence, statements of purpose, and, in some cases, commitment letters confirming the authenticity of the evidence.
More recently, the Office revised its guidelines and held a dedicated training session on these new practices. Our Chinese desk had the opportunity to attend. In light of these updated guidelines and our practical experience, we summarize below the key points to be aware of.
1/ What are the changes in guidelines and practice?
When formally examining a request for non-use cancelation, the Chinese Office now proactively examines the use of the targeted trademark, and assesses the bona fides intention of the Applicant. To support the action, the Applicant must submit a preliminary investigation report with more information and evidence, including but not limited to the following:
- Basic commercial registration information about the owner of the targeted trademark: business scope and status, trademark registration status, etc.
- In case of active business: investigation reports and evidence on its product sales, business premises or office locations, etc.
- Evidence about the non-use of the trademark, especially when the Office actually found potential indication of use.
- Explanation of the Applicant’s reasons for the filing, and disclosure of any connections with possible other cases.
NB: the Applicant’s bona fide commitment, sometimes asked by the Office in its notifications from this past few months, has just been added into the application form as fixed content. Once the form is filed, it means the Applicant undertakes that the provided non-use proof is genuine, accurate and complete.
2/ What kind of evidence of non-use should be provided?
In most cases, the Chinese Office requests online investigation evidences, which should meet the following requirements:
- Resulting from searches conducted on at least three platforms, including general search engines, industry-specific platforms, major e-commerce platforms relevant to the goods covered by the trademark.
- Search terms must include the name of the trademark registrant, the challenged trademark, the approved goods/services and any other relevant keywords
- For each platform, five consecutive full-page screenshots starting from the homepage must be provided.
In some specific cases, when the online investigation report shows signs of trademark use, or if the trademark was previously maintained, the Office may also request on-site investigation evidence.
3/ What consequences for the ‘anonymous’ non-use cancelation actions?
It is common practice in China to hide the real identity of the Applicant of a non-use cancelation action, by filing the action under the name of a straw person. In such cases:
- The action filed anonymously on behalf of the Applicant, whether due to a refusal of application or other reasons, should be disclosed.
- The Office requires this disclosure for internal reference only and should not share this information with the other side. The Office’s primary concern is to determine whether the filing was made in bad faith. However, some practitioners fear that the identity of the applicant might be revealed at the appeal stage.
- So far, such ‘anonymous’ actions are generally not considered malicious non-use cancellation and are not restricted.
- However, when the Office believes there may be malicious circumstances, applicants or their agents will need to cooperate to explain the true purpose of the cancellation application.
4/ When can a non-use cancelation action be considered filed in bad faith?
The Chinese Office explains it is mostly in the following circumstances :
- An applicant files an excessive number of non-use cancellation actions against different registrants, far beyond what is reasonably necessary for trademark clearance.
- An applicant files a cancellation knowing, or when they ought to know, that the challenged trademark is actually in use.
- Repeated non-use cancellation actions are filed against the same trademark.
- Applicants or representatives are engaged in abusive procedural behaviour—such as mass filings without follow-up, failing to respond to official notices or pay fees, or using procedural tactics to block examination.
TO CONCLUDE :
Non-use cancellation actions that are legitimately filed to clear obstacles to a trademark application, or to remove trademarks that are genuinely not in use, should not be adversely affected, as long as all required materials and information are submitted in accordance with the Chinese Office requirements. However, the Office’s examination practice remains new and somewhat inconsistent, with evolving requirements that can vary from case to case.
Applicants should carefully follow the Office’s instructions to avoid rejection. They can mitigate risks by working closely with their Counsel and Chinese representatives, to proactively anticipate the Office’s expectations and reduce the likelihood of amendment notifications.
Registrants, for their part, must diligently use their trademarks and retain solid proof of use to defend against cancellation.
Feel free to contact us if you have any questions on this matter, we will be delighted to assist you.
By Marine DISSOUBRAY & Hong JIANG
