Key Updates on New Rules for Three-Year Non-Use Trademark Cancellation Applications and Practical Insights

Download PDF Version↓

Key Updates on New Rules for Three-Year Non-Use Trademark Cancellation Applications and Practical Insights

 

To further enhance the efficiency of trademark non-use cancellation proceedings and promote standardized filing practices, the Trademark Office of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released a revised Guidelines for Applications for Cancellation of Registered Trademarks Not Used for Three Consecutive Years Without Justifiable Reasons on May 26, 2025. The revised Guidelines further clarify documentary requirements for non-use cancellation filings and specify the scope of preliminary investigation evidence required to demonstrate non-use of the challenged trademark during the relevant three-year period.

 

1. Background of the Revision
2. Surge in Three-Year Non-Use Cancellation Filings and the Rise of Bad-Faith Applications

Since 2017, the number of three-year non-use cancellation applications in China has increased dramatically, rising from approximately 56,000 filings in 2017 to about 229,000 filings in 2024. Alongside this rapid growth, a noticeable increase in applications filed for improper purposes has emerged, including those aimed at unfair competition or the intentional infringement of others’ legitimate rights and interests.

 

The proliferation of bad-faith cancellation applications can largely be attributed to the absence of clear evidentiary requirements imposed on applicants under the previous non-use cancellation framework, in which the burden of proof was primarily placed on trademark registrants. Such abusive filings not only increase enforcement costs for trademark owners and undermine fair market competition, but also place a substantial and unnecessary burden on administrative resources.

 

2. Shift of the Burden of Proof in Three-Year Non-Use Cancellation Proceedings

The allocation of the burden of proof lies at the core of the three-year non-use cancellation system. In China, the evidentiary requirements imposed on applicants in such proceedings have undergone the following stages of development:

 

(1) Before 2022—Reversed Burden of Proof Stage

Applicants were only required to provide a reasonable explanation regarding the alleged non-use of the registered trademark, without the obligation to submit supporting evidence. The burden of proof was largely placed on the trademark registrant.

 

(2) Early 2022 to the End of 2024—Preliminary Evidence Requirement Stage

The Trademark Office began requiring applicants to submit preliminary online investigation evidence together with the application, such as screenshots of search results from mainstream search engines and e-commerce platforms (typically covering the first several pages of results). This marked an initial departure from the long-standing reversed burden of proof approach.

 

(3) Early 2025 to the Issuance of the Revised Guidelines—Enhanced and Systematized Burden of Proof Stage

Starting in early 2025, the Trademark Office significantly raised the evidentiary threshold for applicants by issuing Notifications of Amendment for Applications to Cancel Registered Trademarks for Non-Use for Three Consecutive Years. This development marked a move away from “pro forma evidence” toward “systematic proof by evidence” in examination standards.

During this phase, evidentiary requirements were progressively strengthened as follows:

• From February 2025: Applicants were required to submit basic information on the trademark registrant, a report on the registrant’s business status, and full-page screenshots covering at least five consecutive pages starting from the homepage on no fewer than three platforms (such as comprehensive online platforms and industry-specific websites).
• From March 2025: In addition to the February requirements, applicants were required to submit a declaration. Further clarification was also provided regarding acceptable search keywords, including the registrant’s name, the trademark itself, and combinations of the trademark with the designated goods or services.
• From April 2025: The declaration was further expanded to include a statement confirming that the applicant had not concealed the identity of the true cancellation applicant or any other important facts. Applicants were also required to submit information relating to associated cases, such as new trademark applications or reexamination of rejections.

 

3. Purpose of the Revision

In response to issues that have emerged in practice since early 2025, this revised Guidelines aim to reaffirm and reinforce the original legislative intent of the three-year non-use cancellation system—namely, to promote genuine trademark use—while curbing abusive or bad-faith applications that disrupt market order. The revision also seeks to reduce unnecessary consumption of administrative resources and more effectively safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of trademark owners.

 

1. Key Points of the Revised Guidelines
2. Legal Basis

Article 49 of the Trademark Law provides the statutory basis for three-year non-use cancellation proceedings, stipulating that any entity or individual may apply to cancel a registered trademark that has not been used for three consecutive years without justifiable reasons.

 

Article 66 of the Implementing Regulations of the Trademark Law further refines this mechanism by requiring applicants to “state the relevant facts” when filing a non-use cancellation request.

 

2. Highlights of the Revised Guidelines

The revised Guidelines expressly require applicants to set out the relevant facts in the grounds for cancellation and to submit preliminary investigation evidence demonstrating that the challenged trademark has not been used during the relevant three-year period.

 

Such preliminary evidence includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Information regarding the registrant’s business scope, operational status, or corporate existence;
• Market investigation results relating to the challenged trademark, which are not limited to searches conducted on professional platforms;
• Evidence obtained through online searches, market research, or on-site investigations, including the registrant’s official website, WeChat official account, e-commerce platforms, and offline production or business premises.

 

3. Changes in Practice

While the revised Guidelines clarify the applicant’s burden of proof, the use of the phrase “including but not limited to” together with the broad scope of listed evidence, may introduce a degree of uncertainty in practice. In particular, it raises the question of whether applications that do not include all categories of the listed evidence—especially on-site investigation reports—could be subject to amendment requests or non-acceptance of the application.

 

However, based on examination practice observed since June 2025, the Trademark Office’s approach to evidentiary requirements has generally become more moderate, except in cases involving clearly abusive or bad-faith non-use cancellation filings. In practice, the number of amendment notifications has decreased, the threshold for preliminary evidence have been relaxed, and on-site investigation reports are not uniformly mandated as a strict necessity.

 

III. Practical Recommendations

To help ensure a smooth and effective three-year non-use cancellation process, we recommend that applicants prepare evidentiary materials with a focus on the following aspects:

 

1. Basic Information of the Trademark Registrant

Obtain the registrant’s basic corporate information—such as business scope and operating status—through public enterprise information platforms (e.g., the National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System, Tianyancha, Qichacha). Official documents, including business licenses and annual reports, should be downloaded and retained as supporting evidence.

 

2. Investigation into the Use of the Subject Trademark

Review the registrant’s official website and social media accounts (such as WeChat official accounts, Douyin and Weibo) to determine whether its actual business activities relate to the designated goods or services covered by the subject trademark. Where feasible, publicly available information (e.g., from government platforms) regarding the registrant's tax or social security records may also be collected to corroborate the registrant’s operational status.

 

3. Multi-Platform Search Evidence

Conduct searches on at least three platforms, such as:

• General search engines (e.g., Baidu, 360 Search, Sogou, Bing);
• E-commerce platforms (e.g., Taobao, Tmall, JD.com, Pinduoduo, 1688);
• Lifestyle service platforms (e.g., Meituan, Dianping); or
• Social media platforms (e.g., Xiaohongshu).

For each platform, provide full-page screenshots covering five consecutive pages starting from the homepage, clearly showing the search date, platform name, and search keywords.

 

4. Trademark Portfolio of the Registrant

Search the China Trademark Office database to review the registrant’s trademark portfolio. A comprehensive analysis of its filing patterns may help assess the registrant’s overall intent to use the marks and the likelihood of actual use of the challenged trademark.

 

5. Declaration

Although the revised Guidelines do not mandate submission of a declaration, it is advisable to include a truthful declaration as a precautionary measure. Depending on the circumstances, applicants may also consider filing anonymously and adjusting the wording of the declaration accordingly.

 

6. On-Site Investigation Report (Optional / Contingency Use)

As on-site investigation reports are not currently required in most cases, they need not be submitted proactively. It can be prepared and provided later if an amendment notification is issued.

 

1. Conclusion

The revised Guidelines help rebalance the rights and obligations of both parties in three-year non-use cancellation proceedings and have significantly reduced procedural abuse. Given the complexity of non-use cancellation practice and the rapid evolution of relevant policies, applicants should not only strictly comply with current filing requirements but also closely monitor examination trends and policy developments, adjusting their strategies as necessary to enhance the likelihood of success.

 

 

©2025　北京尚誠知識産権代理有限公司