China’s CNIPA Tightens the Screws on Non-Use Cancellations: A Setback for Anti-Squatting Efforts?

Written by Paolo Beconcini, IP Expert and collaborator of the China IP SME Helpdesk.

Since early 2025, trademark practitioners in China have begun observing a shift in the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)’s approach, marked by stricter requirements for initiating trademark non-use cancellation proceedings. This change could pose significant challenges for rights holders and is viewed by many as a step backward in the long-standing fight against trademark squatting. These changes are being implemented even as discussions continue among relevant institutions in China. We will continue to monitor developments closely and, in the meantime, provide an overview of the current state of affairs.

Non-use as a weapon against trademark squatters

As is well known, trademark squatting has long plagued foreign brand owners in China. For decades, professional trademark squatters have exploited China’s previously lenient "first-to-file" system and minimal filing requirements, enabling them to register trademarks belonging to others, often before the legitimate owners entered the Chinese market. This has forced brands into costly and time-consuming legal battles to reclaim their marks, with no guarantee of success.

After China formally acknowledged the issue, reforms brought measurable improvements. One such measure was the allowance of non-use cancellations based on minimal, often online-sourced, initial evidence, providing an efficient path for rights holders to eliminate squatted marks. CNIPA examiners tended to shift the burden of proof to the squatter if the complainant showed very minimal evidence of prima facie non-use based on a screenshot from Baidu. However, the recent tightening of these requirements may reverse that progress and reintroduce barriers that benefit trademark squatters over legitimate owners.

What is changing, and what rights holders should do

Based on a series of amendment notices issued by the CNIPA since February 2025, it appears that the authority has shifted its approach to non-use cancellation procedures. The CNIPA is now imposing more stringent requirements on applicants, introducing additional obligations for filing. Notably, the standards for what constitutes "sufficient evidence" appear to vary among examiners, leading to inconsistent outcomes in practice. The emerging pattern indicates that prima facie evidence based on a simple screenshot from Baidu.com searches, as it was before, is no longer sufficient, and cancellations relying solely on such evidence are being rejected.

As of now, to successfully file a non-use cancellation with the CNIPA, the following documents, or a substantial portion of them, are generally expected to be submitted alongside the application:

1. Basic Information about the Trademark Owner: Including business scope, legal or operational status, and trademark filing records.
2. Investigation Evidence: If the owner is in operation or in good standing, submit investigation reports and supporting materials showing a lack of trademark use. This may include documentation on the owner’s sales activities, service offerings, business premises, or office locations.
3. Internet Search Evidence: Search results using the trademark and its associated goods/services on multiple comprehensive online platforms. These may include mainstream search engines like Baidu, Bing, Sogou, etc., e-commerce platforms like Taobao, JD.com, Pinduoduo, etc., social media like WeChat, Weibo, Xiaohongshu, Douyin, etc., and industry-oriented websites (if any). The search should provide full-page search screenshots of FIVE consecutive pages starting from the homepage, and the platform search provided should be no less than THREE!
4. Applicant Undertaking: A signed statement affirming that all submitted information and materials are true, accurate, and complete. This should also disclose any related trademark applications or ongoing review of rejection cases, if applicable. This undertaking aims to deter malicious non-use cancellation attempts.

Looking Ahead

It is important to note that the CNIPA is expected to hold an internal meeting soon to finalize and unify these new filing requirements. A formal and consistent standard may be introduced by mid-June 2025. If this approach is upheld, non-use cancellation proceedings will become more complex and significantly more expensive, as attorneys will need to invest more effort and can no longer rely solely on shifting the burden of proof.