Will Your Trademark Survive Examination in China?

 Updated November 2026

Every foreign brand asks the same question before filing in China: will this mark get through? The answer depends on three tests, and examiners apply them in a fixed order. First, does the law forbid the sign outright? Second, does the sign distinguish your goods from anyone else’s? Third, does an earlier registration already cover the same ground? Most applicants worry about the first two. In practice, the third test rejects them.

1. The short answer

A coined word has the best odds. A descriptive phrase has the worst. Anything close to a live registration in the same subclass faces a fight that costs more than a new name.

A crowded register shapes every decision here. At the end of 2025, China had 53.0 million valid trademark registrations, up 6.5 per cent in a year. Short English words, common surnames and category terms sit in the hands of someone already. That single fact explains most refusals.

Two legal provisions do the work. Article 10 bars certain signs outright. The next provision, Article 11, denies registration to signs that cannot distinguish goods. Article 30 then blocks anything identical or similar to an earlier mark. The first two are about your sign. The third is about everyone else’s.

2. How an examiner reads your file

Filing buys you a place in a queue, nothing more. An examiner at CNIPA first checks the paperwork: who applied, which goods you claim, whether the specimen is legible. Then comes the real test, called substantive examination. The examiner classifies your goods, searches the register for earlier marks in the same subclasses, and compares them with yours.

For a word mark, the comparison runs on three axes: how it looks, how it sounds, and what it means. Chinese examiners also transliterate. An English mark can collide with a Chinese registration that sounds the same, and a Chinese mark can collide with an English one that means the same. Applicants who search only in Latin characters miss half the risk.

The statutory window is nine months. In 2025 the average ran at four months, which is fast by any standard. Speed cuts both ways: a refusal arrives before your launch, not after.

3. Test one: signs the law forbids

Article 10 lists signs that can never serve as trademarks, registered or not. The list covers national names, flags, emblems and anthems, and anything closely resembling them. It also covers the names and emblems of central state organs, the names of their seats, and landmark buildings. Red Cross and Red Crescent symbols are on the list, as are signs that deceive the public about quality, origin or place of production, and signs that offend public order or morals.

Two points trip up foreign applicants. First, the country-code abbreviation CN counts as a national name, and examiners refuse it. No amount of design work fixes that, because the objection is to the meaning, not the artwork. Second, this provision bans use, not merely registration. A mark that falls under Article 10 cannot sit on your packaging while you argue about it.

Administrative place names deserve a separate note. Article 10 also excludes county-level or higher administrative divisions, and foreign place names the Chinese public knows. A town name can pass if it carries another meaning, and a collective or certification mark can use a place name to identify origin. Ordinary brand names cannot.

The 2026 revision sharpens this gate. An applicant who knows a sign is deceptive and files anyway now faces liability, and the same conduct in use can lead to revocation. CNIPA has refused 1.27 million applications of this kind since 2023, mostly marks that dressed up a specification as a brand.

4. Test two: distinctiveness

Article 11 denies registration in three situations. The sign is only the generic name,图形 or model of the goods. The sign only describes quality, main raw material, function, intended use, weight, quantity or another characteristic. Or the sign lacks distinctive character for any other reason.

In practice, examiners refuse marks that read like a product description. PURE SILK for textiles, 24H for delivery, BEST for anything: each tells the buyer what the goods are, not who made them. A single letter, a plain number, or a common laudatory word faces the same objection.

Examiners judge foreign words by their Chinese meaning. If the relevant public would read your English mark as a description, the objection applies even where the English is unusual. That is why literal translations of descriptive phrases fail, while coined words and deliberate misspellings pass.

The law also excludes functional shapes. A three-dimensional mark cannot be registered where the shape follows from the nature of the goods, delivers a technical result, or adds substantial value. A bottle shaped to fit a machine is not a brand.

5. The escape hatch: proof of use

Article 11 has a second paragraph, and it matters. A sign that lacks inherent distinctiveness can still reach registration if it has acquired distinctive character through use and the public recognises it. The burden sits entirely with the applicant.

Useful evidence includes sales revenue in China, advertising spend and media coverage, the duration and scope of use, market share, industry rankings, and consumer surveys. All of it must relate to China, to the goods claimed, and to the period before the filing date. Foreign sales carry little weight on their own.

Examiners set the bar high. A few months of trading, a website and a trade show booth rarely suffice. Think in years, national coverage and verifiable third-party data, or pick a different mark.

6. Test three: earlier rights, the real filter

Article 30 refuses an application that is identical or similar to a registered or preliminarily approved mark, for the same or similar goods. China also follows first-to-file under Article 31, so the earlier application date wins, whether or not the earlier applicant trades under the mark.

Examiners compare both the goods and the signs. The Chinese classification table groups goods into subclasses, and examiners work subclass by subclass. Two products in the same class but different subclasses usually escape conflict. The class headings themselves come from the Nice system, which China applies with its own subdivisions. Two products in different classes can still conflict where one is famous.

For the signs, the test is overall impression, weighted towards the distinctive element. Similarity in appearance, pronunciation or meaning is enough, and examiners do not require all three. That is why a Chinese mark with the same sound can block a coined English word, and why a logo rarely saves a descriptive word. In a combined mark, examiners search the word and the device separately.

A crowded register makes this the decisive test. Thirty years of filings have consumed the obvious names. Applicants who check only their own class, and only in English, discover the problem after paying the fee.

7. When the obstacle is a squatter

Article 32 protects prior rights and prior use. It bars registration that infringes an existing right, such as copyright, a personal name, a trade name or a design patent. It also bars filing by improper means a mark that another party already used and made influential.

Article 4 adds a second layer, aimed at filings made without intent to use. The 2026 revision turns that principle into an explicit refusal ground. An application filed without intent to use, and clearly beyond normal business needs, now faces refusal. Bad-faith filings that cause adverse effects can draw a warning and a fine of up to RMB 100,000, and agencies that assist them face penalties too.

For a brand owner facing a blocking registration, four routes exist. Cancel it for three years of non-use. Invalidate it on bad-faith or prior-right grounds. Buy it. Or narrow your own goods until the conflict disappears. Each has a cost and a timeline, and the article on bad-faith filings covers each of them.

8. What the refusal data shows

China publishes enough data to price the risk. In 2025, parties filed 352,000 review and invalidation cases, down 15.4 per cent. Refusal reviews accounted for 269,000 of them. CNIPA decided 384,000 cases, including 288,000 refusal reviews, at an average of 5.5 months each.

Read the last two rows together. A third of the wins came not from argument but from the blocking mark dying. Another third came from persuading the examiner that the marks differ. Both routes are available after refusal, and both cost more than a search would have.

The figures come from a third-party database cited by the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, not from CNIPA directly. Treat them as an order of magnitude, not an exact rate. The direction is unambiguous either way: review is a remedy, not a strategy.

9. If CNIPA refuses your mark

You have fifteen days from receipt of the refusal to file a review with the Trademark Review and Adjudication Department. The deadline does not extend, and missing it ends the application. The official fee is RMB 750 on paper, or RMB 675 electronically.

Five moves are available, and they combine. Argue that the marks differ, using the three-axis test and the goods comparison. Cancel the cited mark for three years of non-use, which takes about nine months. Invalidate it where you can show bad faith or prior rights. Buy or take an assignment of it. Or delete the conflicting goods and keep the rest, which the data shows is a common route to partial approval.

A consent letter from the earlier owner helps less than clients expect. Chinese practice treats it as one factor, not a waiver, because the register protects consumers as well as competitors. Do not budget on it.

10. A checklist before you file

Search in three directions, not one. Start with the identical mark. Then look for marks sharing your first syllable or distinctive element. Finally, check Chinese equivalents and transliterations of your name. Then repeat the search in each subclass you intend to claim, because a clean result in one subclass says nothing about the next.

Choose the mark with a registrability opinion, not with a marketing deck. Coined words, unusual spellings and invented compounds clear the first two tests. Descriptive words need years of evidence before they clear the second. And a name that reads as a product feature will keep costing you, in refusals, in oppositions and in enforcement.

File a black-and-white word mark, which covers any later colour and typeface. Add the Chinese version separately if you trade under one. Keep dated specimens from the first sale, because acquired distinctiveness is proven backwards, from evidence you collected before anyone asked.

Finally, remember that rights are territorial. A US or EU registration gives you nothing in China beyond a six-month priority window. The examination is separate, the register is separate, and the refusal risk is separate. Once the mark clears, the steps after filing are set out in the procedure guide. If your filing strategy is still open, compare routes in Madrid versus direct filing. Goods wording is the other half of the job, and the subclass rules in section 6 decide how far your claim reaches.

The cheapest refusal is the one you never file.

Frequently asked questions