CNIPA’s Non-Use Cancellation Practice: A Continuing Evolution

Source: Rick Tan, IP Counsel at Jiaquan IP Law

In February 2025, I shared insights into CNIPA's shifting stance on non-use cancellation procedures, highlighting the introduction of more stringent evidentiary requirements.

At that time, the rectification notices began demanding:

• Registrant Information: Details about the trademark owner's business scope, operational status, and trademark portfolio.
• Business Activity Evidence: Documentation of the owner's commercial activities, such as sales or service reports, and verification of business premises.
• Online Search Documentation: Evidence from at least three different online platforms, including five consecutive pages of full-page screenshots from each, starting from the homepage.

These changes appeared aimed at curbing malicious non-use cancellation requests, particularly those involving multiple filings against a single trademark.

Recent Developments: Emphasis on Good Faith and Disclosure of Related Matters

Since April 2025, we've observed further developments in CNIPA's approach. The latest rectification notices that we received, have introduced new requirements:

• Declaration of Good Faith: Applicants and their representatives must submit a signed declaration affirming that no material facts have been concealed and that all submitted materials are truthful, accurate, and complete. More specifically, this declaration is focused on confirming the genuine identity of the cancellation applicant—ensuring that the applicant is not a "shell" or intermediary used to disguise the true intentions behind the cancellation request. This is a direct attempt to prevent "sham" or malicious applicants who file cancellations under third-party names in an effort to bypass or exploit the system.
• Disclosure of Related Matters: Applicants may now be also required to disclose whether there are any related trademark applications, ongoing review of refusals, or proceedings regarding the trademark in question. The notice explicitly states that if no such related matters exist, applicants must submit a formal declaration confirming this. Interestingly, some earlier requirements—like submitting detailed evidence of business activity—are no longer explicitly mentioned in the latest CNIPA notices. This shift suggests a recalibration in CNIPA's approach, placing greater emphasis on the applicant's integrity and the authenticity of submitted evidence, rather than imposing an unreasonable burden. For instance, verifying business premises through on-site inspections is both time-consuming and costly.

Implications for Trademark Professionals

These evolving requirements indicate CNIPA's commitment to maintaining the integrity of the trademark system. For foreign trademark professionals, it's essential to recognize that non-use cancellation strategies in China now demand more meticulous preparation. The increased burden on applicants necessitates thorough investigations and documentation before filing. Moreover, the requirement for a declaration of good faith highlights the importance of transparency and honesty in the application process. Failure to comply with these new standards may result in the rejection of the cancellation request or other legal consequences.

Looking Ahead

As CNIPA continues to refine its approach to non-use cancellations, trademark professionals should stay informed about these developments and adjust their practices accordingly. While the new requirements may increase the complexity and cost of filing a cancellation, they also promote a more equitable and reliable trademark system in China. For those seeking to navigate these changes effectively, collaboration with experienced local counsel will be essential.