In 2025, China’s National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has introduced a series of major reforms to the trademark “Non-Use Cancellation” process in practice. These changes aim to address the misuse of the cancellation system, enhance the protection of legitimate trademark rights, improve the overall efficiency of examination, and promote the fairness and healthy development of the trademark market.

Background of the Reforms

The “Non-Use Cancellation” system is designed to cancel trademarks that have not been used for three consecutive years, in order to free up valuable trademark resources. However, in the past, the system was sometimes exploited by frequently submitting for cancellation requests without needing to provide substantive evidence, to harass competitors or speculate on trademark values.

Key Changes in the New Rules

· Change in Burden of Proof

Under the old rules, the burden of proof was on the trademark holder to demonstrate that the trademark had been in use, the cancellation petitioner only needs to file a request without needing to provide substantive evidence. The new rules, however, place more burden on the cancellation petitioner. The cancellation petitioner must now provide a comprehensive evidence chain to prove that the trademark has not been used for three consecutive years.

· Enhanced Evidence Requirements for Cancellation Applications

Cancellation petitioners are now required to submit detailed evidence, including the below (Requirements may vary slightly in different cases):

Ø  Basic information of the trademark registrant, including business scope or business scope, business status or status of existence, trademark registration status, etc.;

Ø  Search investigation evidence showing the trademark registrant name, trademark name, trademark name + approved product/service name and other keywords in full;

Ø  Internet search evidence covering at least 3 platforms such as Baidu, Taobao, and WeChat, each providing 5 consecutive pages of search results screenshots from the homepage (including timestamps);

Ø  Field investigation records: Visit the registrant's business premises, supermarkets, etc., with photos and merchants' non-sale statements;

Ø  Industry research report or third-party analysis including investigation methods, evidence list, and conclusion analysis.

· Commercial Relevance Verification

Instead of allowing filing Non-Use Cancellations anonymously without indicating the identity of the true petitioner, the true petitioner must be disclosed in the cancellation applications now. The petitioners must now demonstrate a direct commercial relevance between the Cancellation request and their own trademark applications or disputes. This measure aims to ensure that the Cancellation process serves genuine commercial needs and prevents malicious applications.

· Introduction of Credit Penalties

The new rules require petitioners and agencies to sign a stamped letter of authenticity commitment, and introduce credit penalties for petitioners and agents who submit false materials or conceal the true identity of the petitioner. Violators may face credit downgrades, restrictions on future applications, and even administrative penalties.

Impact to the relevant parties

· For Cancellation Petitioners:

The new rules significantly increase the cost and complexity of filing a cancellation request. Petitioners need to invest more time and money in the process of evidence collection. However, for those with legitimate commercial needs, the reforms provide a more transparent and fair system.

· For Trademark Holders:

The new rules are beneficial for trademark holders, who will be less susceptible to malicious interference and can focus more on brand building. Meanwhile, with the substantial increase on the requirements for cancellation applications, the examination on use evidence provided by trademark registrants will also be more stringent. Registrants need to systematically retain evidence of use (such as regular sales on e-commerce platforms, standardizing contract notes on trademark information, etc.), otherwise they may lose their trademark rights due to insufficient evidence.

The above information is based on the current practice and observations, the official announcement of the new rules or the new version of the application form under the new rules is still waiting to be issued by the CNIPA. If there is any new progress, we will update in time.