What Is the Non‑use Cancellation Period in China: Evidence Standards, Timelines and CNIPA Updates

Understanding what is the non‑use cancellation period in China is now a front‑line concern for every brand owner, in‑house counsel and trademark agent with registrations at the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). Under Article 49 of the PRC Trademark Law, any person or entity may apply to cancel a registered trademark that has not been used for three consecutive years, a mechanism known in Chinese practice as “撤三” (chè sān). CNIPA tightened its evidentiary requirements in 2025, raising the bar for both applicants and registrants.

This guide sets out the statutory framework, explains precisely how to count the three‑year window, details the evidence CNIPA now accepts and rejects, and provides step‑by‑step playbooks for filing or defending non‑use cancellations in China.

TL;DR, What Practitioners Must Know About Non‑Use Cancellations in China

A registered trademark in China may be cancelled if it has gone unused for three consecutive years. The three‑year clock generally runs backwards from the date a cancellation application is filed. Once CNIPA accepts the application, the burden shifts to the registrant to prove genuine use during the relevant three‑year window.

Three essentials for immediate action:

• Offensive filers: Confirm the target mark has been registered for at least three years and assemble a clear statement of grounds before filing.
• Defensive registrants: Begin collecting dated invoices, e‑commerce order records and customs documents now, CNIPA’s 2025 practice demands stronger proof of use than ever before.
• Timeline awareness: A registrant typically has two months from receipt of a CNIPA amendment or rectification notice to submit evidence. Missing this deadline can be fatal.

The Legal Rule, Article 49 and Counting the Three Years

Article 49 of the PRC Trademark Law states that where a registered trademark has become the generic name of the goods for which its use has been approved, or where it has not been used for three consecutive years without justifiable reason, any entity or individual may apply to CNIPA for its cancellation. This is the statutory anchor for every three‑year non‑use cancellation in China.

How the three‑year period is calculated

The three‑year period runs backwards from the date on which the cancellation application is filed with CNIPA. It does not begin from the registration date or from the publication date of the mark. Article 66 of the Implementing Regulations clarifies that the relevant “continuous three‑year period” is the three full years immediately preceding the application date. For example, if a cancellation is filed on 1 June 2026, the registrant must demonstrate genuine use at any point between 1 June 2023 and 31 May 2026.

When does the three‑year non‑use period start?

A mark becomes eligible for a non‑use cancellation action once it has been registered for at least three years. In practice this means practitioners count from the registration approval and publication date to confirm eligibility before filing. The relevant window of proof, however, is always the three years immediately before the cancellation application date, not the three years following registration.

Burden of proof

Once CNIPA accepts a cancellation application, the burden shifts entirely to the registrant. CNIPA will notify the registrant, who must then submit evidence of genuine use. If the registrant fails to respond or submits insufficient evidence, CNIPA will cancel the registration. This burden allocation is critical for both foreign and domestic registrants and reflects a core feature of cancellation proceedings in China.

CNIPA 2025 Practice Changes, What Changed and Why It Matters

Starting in early 2025, CNIPA introduced a series of procedural tightening measures aimed at curbing abusive or speculative non‑use cancellation filings while simultaneously raising the evidentiary threshold for registrants. Industry observers expect these changes to reshape filing strategies for years to come.

Letters of undertaking

CNIPA began issuing amendment and rectification notices to applicants in April–May 2025, in some cases requiring filers to submit letters of undertaking (承诺书) confirming that their cancellation applications are not filed in bad faith or as part of mass batch filings. Applicants who cannot demonstrate a legitimate interest or who file large numbers of cancellations against unrelated marks may see their applications refused at the intake stage.

Stricter evidence intake and rectification notices

On the registrant side, CNIPA raised the initial quality threshold for evidence submissions. Rectification notices now request clearer documentation chains, for instance, CNIPA may reject evidence bundles that consist solely of aggregated screenshots without transaction‑level detail, or invoices that lack fapiao (official tax invoice) corroboration. Practitioners report that CNIPA typically allows two months from the date of a rectification notice for supplementary evidence, making rapid internal evidence audits essential.

Impact on batch and speculative filings

The likely practical effect of these 2025 changes is twofold. First, mass filings by trademark squatters or clearance agents operating on volume will face greater scrutiny. Second, legitimate brand owners defending their marks will need to maintain stronger contemporaneous records of use. Early indications suggest that initial dismissal rates for poorly substantiated applications have risen since the reforms took effect.

What Counts as “Use” in China, Acceptable Evidence for CNIPA Non‑Use Cases

Proof of use in China must demonstrate that the registered mark has been genuinely used in commerce on the approved goods or services during the relevant three‑year window. Token or symbolic use will not suffice. The following categories represent the evidence types CNIPA consistently accepts, subject to the 2025 heightened standards.

Direct domestic use: sales receipts, invoices and tax records

Domestic fapiao (增值税发票) bearing the trademark, corresponding bank receipts, and sales contracts are the gold standard. Each document should clearly show the trademark, the goods or services, a date within the three‑year window, and the identity of the buyer. Practitioners should annotate each invoice to highlight the relevant trademark and cross‑reference it to the registration number.

Mini‑template, invoice annotation:

• Document reference: Invoice No. [XXXX]
• Date: [DD/MM/YYYY], within 3‑year window? [Yes/No]
• Trademark shown: [Mark], matches Reg. No. [XXXX]? [Yes/No]
• Goods/services described: [Description], matches approved specification? [Yes/No]
• Buyer identity: [Name/entity]

Online sales: screenshots, order IDs and back‑end evidence

E‑commerce evidence from platforms such as Tmall, JD.com, Taobao, Pinduoduo and cross‑border platforms is increasingly important. CNIPA expects screenshots that include visible timestamps, order numbers, product listings showing the trademark, and ideally back‑end seller portal reports confirming fulfilment. Aggregated storefront screenshots without individual transaction data are a common red flag that CNIPA will reject.

Mini‑template, screenshot log:

• Platform: [e.g., Tmall]
• Screenshot date captured: [DD/MM/YYYY]
• Order/transaction ID visible: [Yes/No]
• Trademark visible on listing: [Yes/No]
• Product category matches registration: [Yes/No]
• Fulfilment/shipping record attached: [Yes/No]

Export and OEM evidence: customs declarations and contracts

For foreign registrants who manufacture in China for export, customs export declarations (报关单) paired with OEM manufacturing contracts and quality inspection reports can constitute valid proof of use. The key requirement is demonstrating a genuine commercial channel connected to China, goods that never enter Chinese commerce and bear no connection to the Chinese market may not satisfy CNIPA’s trademark use requirements in China. Distributor agreements naming the trademark and showing import into or sale within China strengthen the evidentiary chain considerably.

Licensing and authorisation agreements

A recorded trademark licence agreement, combined with evidence that the licensee actually used the mark in commerce (licensee invoices, product photographs, advertising), can establish use by the registrant. CNIPA expects to see quality‑control provisions in the licence and evidence that the registrant exercised oversight. An unrecorded licence is not automatically fatal but weakens the submission.

Advertising and promotional use

Dated advertising placements, print media insertion orders, digital advertising invoices (e.g., Baidu SEM receipts, WeChat advertising contracts), trade‑show booth records and catalogues, can serve as supporting evidence. Standing alone, advertising is generally insufficient; CNIPA looks for a chain linking promotional activity to actual commercial transactions.

When samples and packaging count

Product packaging, labels and samples bearing the trademark may be submitted, but only when accompanied by dated production records, purchase orders or delivery notes. Undated physical samples carry minimal weight. Bilingual specimen guidance: ensure all Chinese‑language documents are accompanied by a certified English translation (or vice versa for foreign evidence), and that the translator’s declaration is notarised where CNIPA requests formal certification.

How CNIPA Reviews a Non‑Use Cancellation Application, Timelines and Procedural Steps

Cancellation proceedings in China follow a structured administrative pathway. The table below summarises the typical timeline practitioners should plan around.

Practical tips: ensure all foreign‑language evidence is accompanied by certified Chinese translations. Notarisation and legalisation (apostille where applicable) should be arranged well in advance, delays in obtaining consular certification are a frequent cause of missed deadlines in non‑use cancellations in China.

Filing a Non‑Use Cancellation: Step‑by‑Step for Applicants

Applicants considering an offensive filing should follow a structured workflow to maximise the likelihood of success and avoid CNIPA’s tightened intake scrutiny.

1. Preliminary search and eligibility check. Confirm the target mark has been registered for at least three years. Search CNIPA’s online database to verify registration status, approved goods/services and any recorded licence or assignment.
2. Risk assessment. Evaluate whether the registrant is likely to have genuine use evidence. Check e‑commerce platforms, customs databases and industry directories for signs of commercial activity. If the mark appears actively used, reconsider filing.
3. Draft statement of grounds. Prepare a clear, concise statement explaining why the mark should be cancelled. Under the 2025 practice, vague or boilerplate statements may trigger a rectification notice.
4. Prepare supporting documentation. Include identity documents, power of attorney (notarised and legalised for foreign applicants) and, where requested, a letter of undertaking confirming the application is not filed in bad faith.
5. File and pay the CNIPA official fee. The official government fee for a non‑use cancellation application is RMB 500 per class per mark.
6. Monitor and respond. Track CNIPA’s processing and respond promptly to any amendment or rectification notices within the specified deadline.

When not to file

• The target mark is clearly in active commercial use, filing will waste resources and may attract scrutiny under CNIPA’s anti‑abuse measures.
• Your own replacement application is not yet ready, a successful cancellation opens the mark for third‑party filing, so coordinate re‑filing timing carefully.
• You are filing as part of a large batch without differentiated grounds, CNIPA’s 2025 reforms specifically target mass cancellation campaigns.

Defending a Non‑Use Cancellation: Practical Defence Playbook

Registrants who receive a CNIPA non‑use cancellation notice must act within the two‑month response window. Delay or weak evidence submission is the single most common reason marks are cancelled.

Immediate evidence triage (Days 1–7)

• Identify the three‑year window specified in CNIPA’s notice.
• Audit internal records: sales invoices, fapiao, contracts, advertising receipts, e‑commerce platform data and customs export records that fall within the window.
• Flag any evidence that requires translation, notarisation or third‑party confirmation.

Building the evidence package (Days 8–40)

• Prioritise fapiao and bank‑reconciled invoices, these carry the highest weight with CNIPA.
• Supplement with e‑commerce platform back‑end reports showing orders, fulfilment and the trademark on listings.
• Obtain declarations from distributors, licensees or business partners confirming commercial use of the mark.
• Prepare a structured evidence index listing each exhibit, its date, the trademark shown, and its relevance to the approved goods or services.

Responding to CNIPA amendment or rectification notices

If CNIPA issues a rectification notice requesting additional or clearer evidence, respond within the stipulated two‑month period. Common requests include: clearer copies of invoices, transaction‑level e‑commerce data rather than aggregated screenshots, or proof linking advertising spend to actual sales. Failure to respond to a rectification notice will almost certainly result in cancellation of the mark.

Post‑decision options

If the mark is cancelled, the registrant may appeal to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) within 15 days. Further judicial review before the Beijing Intellectual Property Court is available. During the appeal, gather any additional evidence of use that may have been overlooked in the initial response.

Non‑Use Cancellation Outcomes by Entity Type

Costs, Likely Outcomes and Enforcement Impact

The official CNIPA fee for a non‑use cancellation application is RMB 500 per class per mark. Agent and legal fees vary significantly depending on complexity, but practitioners should budget approximately RMB 3,000–8,000 for a straightforward single‑class filing through a local agent, and considerably more where foreign‑language evidence, notarisation and strategic coordination are involved. Defence costs tend to be higher, particularly where evidence must be collected from multiple jurisdictions or translated and certified.

Industry observers expect that CNIPA’s 2025 reforms will gradually increase the success rate for registrants who maintain robust contemporaneous records, while reducing the number of speculative cancellation attempts. Where a cancellation is ultimately upheld, the consequences are serious: the mark loses its registration protection, enforcement actions against infringers become untenable, and competitors or squatters may file fresh applications for the same or similar mark. Registrants should consider re‑filing strategies and monitoring programmes to mitigate this risk.

Quick Templates and Specimen Annex, What to Submit

The following three mini‑templates help practitioners organise their evidence submissions for CNIPA non‑use evidence reviews. Adapt each to the specific facts of the case.

Template 1, Evidence index

Template 2, Invoice annotation (bilingual)

• 发票编号 / Invoice No.: [XXXX]
• 日期 / Date: [DD/MM/YYYY]
• 商标 / Trademark: [Mark as registered], Reg. No. [XXXX]
• 商品/服务 / Goods/Services: [Description matching approved specification]
• 买方 / Buyer: [Entity name]
• 金额 / Amount: [RMB XXXX]

Template 3, Screenshot log for e‑commerce evidence

• 平台 / Platform: [Tmall / JD.com / Pinduoduo / other]
• 截图日期 / Screenshot date: [DD/MM/YYYY]
• 订单号 / Order ID: [visible in screenshot: Yes/No]
• 商标可见 / Trademark visible: [Yes/No]
• 商品类别 / Product category: [matches registration: Yes/No]
• 物流记录 / Shipping record: [attached: Yes/No]

All Chinese‑language evidence should be accompanied by a certified English translation (or the reverse, for evidence originating in English). Include the translator’s signed declaration and, where CNIPA requires it, notarisation of the translation.

Conclusion

The non‑use cancellation period in China remains firmly set at three consecutive years of non‑use under Article 49 of the PRC Trademark Law, but CNIPA’s 2025 practice reforms have materially changed what it takes to file, and survive, a cancellation action. Brand owners with marks registered in China should treat contemporaneous evidence collection as a routine compliance function, not a last‑minute scramble. Practitioners should audit evidence readiness annually, maintain bilingual documentation, and ensure that fapiao, e‑commerce records and customs documents are systematically archived.

Whether you need to clear a blocking mark or defend a registration against a non‑use challenge, early preparation and expert guidance are decisive. Engaging experienced China trademark counsel at the earliest stage will protect your position under CNIPA’s tightened evidentiary standards.

This article provides general legal guidance on non‑use cancellations in China and does not constitute legal advice. Specific cases should be assessed by a qualified trademark professional familiar with CNIPA practice and PRC law.

Sources

1. PRC Trademark Law (English), WIPO Lex
2. Regulations for the Implementation of the PRC Trademark Law, WIPO Lex
3. CNIPA Official English Portal
4. Dennemeyer, China Updates Guidance on Trademark Non‑Use Cancellations
5. World Trademark Review, Strategic Considerations as CNIPA Introduces New Evidence Requirements
6. Lee & Li, CNIPA Non‑Use Cancellation Practice Update