[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, if a registered trademark is not used for three consecutive years without justifiable reasons, any unit or individual may apply to the China Intellectual Property Administration for its revocation, which is referred to in practice as "Revocation of Three Years of Non-Use". According to Article 49 Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended and implemented on November 1, 2019), the registrant shall submit evidence of use prior to the application for revocation within two months from the date of receipt of the notice; Article 48 clearly stipulates that the use of a trademark must be genuine, open, and aimed at identifying the source in commercial activities. If the evidence is not submitted within the time limit or is not recognized, the trademark will be revoked; if the registrant disagrees with the revocation decision, he/she may apply for a review within 15 days from the date of receipt of the decision. Enterprises should regularly clean up idle trademarks and archive the evidence of use simultaneously.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

The "Three Withdrawal System" targets idle trademarks that are "registered but not used". Typical scenarios include: enterprises registering trademarks defensively and not putting them on the market for a long time; old trademarks being shelved after a brand name change; failing to retain evidence after licensing others to use the trademark; and competitors initiating "Three Withdrawal" procedures against core trademarks. With a dense trademark layout in the Beijing area, such disputes are relatively common. Many registrants mistakenly believe that trademarks will not be revoked during their validity period, and only take action to collect evidence when they receive a notice. Trademark layout and compliance arrangements can be combined with each other.Intellectual property protection and corporate legal servicesCoordinated assessment.

II. Key points of contention

There are three key points of contention. First, whether it constitutes use within the meaning of trademark law: it must be public and genuine commercial use, and internal use or merely symbolic use to maintain registration is generally not recognized. Second, whether there are legitimate reasons: force majeure, policy restrictions, bankruptcy liquidation, etc. can constitute legitimate reasons for non-use for three consecutive years, but ordinary operating difficulties generally cannot be established. Third, the scope and timing of evidence: it must refer to the three years prior to the filing of the revocation application, and reflect the corresponding relationship between the trademark logo, the use time, and the approved goods or services. For the standardization of enterprise contract texts, you can refer to the relevant provisions.Business and contract dispute resolution services for enterprisesThe processing approach of the problem.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

The maintenance and remedies of trademark rights ultimately depend on actual use and evidence. Taking a trademark infringement and unfair competition case handled by Attorney Liu Yuanyuan of our firm as an example: The plaintiff, Company A, is a well-known paper industry enterprise. Its "EFGH" trademark was approved for use on sanitary napkins in Category 5 and was recognized as a well-known trademark. The defendant, Company B, obtained authorization from a third party in September 2023 to use the "EFGK" trademark and design patent to produce and sell similar sanitary napkins. Company A sued in April 2024, alleging imitation of a well-known trademark and confusion over packaging design, seeking compensation of 980,000 yuan. Attorney Liu Yuanyuan argued that: The logo originated from a legally registered trademark, and the suffix "GK" differed significantly from "GH", which could be distinguished by the general public; The packaging design was based on a design patent, but Company A only submitted a copyright registration without proving actual use and recognition; Moreover, the authorization period was short, the production volume was low, the pricing was low, and the product had already been discontinued. Therefore, there was no basis for high compensation. The court accepted some of the arguments, determined that trademark infringement had occurred and rejected the claim of unfair competition, awarding economic damages of 50,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of 10,000 yuan, totaling 60,000 yuan, which was 920,000 yuan lower than the original claim. This case follows the same judgment logic as the cancellation of a trademark registration: The stability of rights and the degree of well-knownness both depend on whether there is verifiable actual use. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Liu YuanyuanThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202011201094, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The legal basis is Article 48 (Definition of Trademark Use), Article 49 Paragraph 2 (Revocation for Non-Use for Three Consecutive Years), and Article 54 (Application for Review) of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended and implemented on November 1, 2019); Article 66 (Two-month Evidence Submission Deadline) of the Implementing Regulations of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (implemented on May 1, 2014). Practical suggestions: First, establish a trademark use file, and keep contracts, invoices, advertisements, packaging samples, and e-commerce page data with logos on an annual basis, ensuring that the time period is reflected; Second, immediately verify the correspondence between the approved goods or services and the evidence after receiving the notice, and complete the defense within two months; Third, promptly transfer, license, or abandon trademarks that are truly not needed for use; Fourth, defensive trademarks should also maintain a minimum level of actual use traces. Trademark asset management can be carried out through the following methods:Special services and other case-related servicesYou can also consult with the professional team or look it up for yourself.Beijing Henglu Law FirmOfficial website.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

The revocation of a trademark registration does not mean "revocation all the way": the registrant can continue to assert their rights through a re-examination and subsequent administrative litigation, but there are strict deadlines for each step—two months for a defense and 15 days for a re-examination. Failure to meet the deadlines will result in the loss of procedural opportunities. It is also necessary to remind applicants that successful revocation does not necessarily mean they will be granted registration. Trademark rights have the characteristic of "use it or lose it". Rather than making hasty remedies afterwards, it is better to use the trademark properly and keep records for archiving in the future.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If someone else applies for the cancellation of my registered trademark, can I still keep it?

Whether the registration can be maintained depends on whether the trademark use evidence meeting the requirements can be submitted within the statutory time limit. According to Article 49 Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China, as long as there is genuine, public commercial use corresponding to the approved goods or services within three years before the revocation application is filed, or there are justifiable reasons such as force majeure, the registered trademark can usually be maintained. In review practice, internal documents and bills without dates or trademark logos are often not accepted. It is recommended to sort out and supplement the evidence as soon as possible after receiving the notice, and to entrust a professional lawyer to organize the defense when necessary.

Q2: What kind of usage evidence is required for the "Three-Year Retention Period" defense?

The key point is to be able to simultaneously demonstrate the trademark logo, the usage period, and evidence of the designated goods or services, including photos of the trademarked product packaging and actual products, sales contracts and corresponding invoices, distribution or franchise agreements, advertising placement contracts and screenshots of the ads, e-commerce platform product pages and transaction records, trademark license contracts and filing materials, etc. The evidence should form a chronologically continuous chain as much as possible, covering the three years prior to the filing of the revocation application. If the user of the trademark is a licensee, they must also submit proof of the licensing relationship. It is recommended to file the materials annually to avoid making last-minute preparations.

Q3: Approximately how much does it cost to initiate a Section 3 review or respond to one?

To file a revocation application with the China Intellectual Property Administration, a statutory fee must be paid, the specific amount of which shall be subject to the current charging standards; the registrant generally does not need to pay additional fees for the defense. Lawyer's fees vary greatly depending on whether they include investigation and evidence collection, review, and even administrative litigation. They are usually charged on a per-case basis and can be negotiated with the law firm and included in the entrustment contract. It is recommended to first assess the actual use and commercial value of the trademark, and then decide whether to defend it, negotiate a transfer, or abandon it.

Q4: How long does it usually take from the application to the issuance of the result for a "Three-stage Review"?

According to Article 49 Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China and relevant procedural provisions, the Trademark Office shall notify the registrant after accepting the cancellation application, and the registrant shall submit evidence of use within two months. Thereafter, the Trademark Office will make a decision after review, the time of which will vary depending on the complexity of the evidence. If the registrant disagrees with the decision, he/she may apply for a review within 15 days from the date of receipt of the decision; if he/she disagrees with the review decision, he/she may also file an administrative lawsuit in accordance with the law. It usually takes several months or even longer from the application to the final determination of the result, so it is recommended to plan in advance.

Q5: If you find that your trademark has been subject to a request for cancellation, what should you do specifically?

It is recommended to follow four steps: First, confirm the date of receiving the notice, and calculate the two-month defense period from that date; Second, immediately inventory the evidence of use within the three years prior to the withdrawal of the application, and match it item by item according to the categories of goods or services; Third, prepare a list of evidence and write defense opinions, focusing on explaining the authenticity, publicity, and continuity of the use; Fourth, simultaneously evaluate the commercial value of the trademark. If there is really no need for use, you can consider negotiating a transfer or taking active measures to dispose of it. Throughout the process, keep all the submitted documents and, if necessary, engage a lawyer to assist you.

The above Q&A is mainly based on judicial practices in Beijing. There may be differences in the interpretation of judgments in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

VII. Related public cases (for reference, not handled by our firm)

The following cases are all sourced from the official websites of courts at all levels, judicial authorities, and authoritative media, and are not related to the cases handled by our firm. They are provided solely for reference in understanding relevant adjudication rules and do not constitute opinions on specific cases.

[Case Number](2021) No. 154 of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China
[Trial Court]The Supreme People's Court (review of an administrative judgment, case involving the revocation of the "WENYI" trademark)
[Judicial Summary]Yu * * * * filed a lawsuit to revoke the "WENYI" trademark of a Hangzhou e-commerce company for three consecutive years of non-use. The Supreme People's Court held in its review that the purpose of the Trademark Law's provision on revoking trademarks for three consecutive years of non-use is to urge trademark holders to actively use registered trademarks and clear up idle trademark resources. The term "use" in this provision should refer to trademark-specific use, that is, the trademark holder or licensee intends to genuinely use the trademark, attaches it to the approved products or services, and puts it into the public commercial circulation field, so that the relevant public can identify its source. In this case, the disputed trademark only occupies two characters in the product name and is not obviously distinctive. The words "WENYI" are often paired with words such as "simple", "retro", and "fresh" in clothing product names to describe the style of the products, which is a description of the product's characteristics rather than an indication of its source. Therefore, it cannot be regarded as genuine and effective use. The court revoked the judgments of the first and second instances and upheld the contested revocation decision.
[Source]The official website of the People's Court of Zhenhai District, Ningbo City (Legal Risk Alert on Trademark Registration and Right Maintenance) (2021-09)

[Case No.](2023) No. 4336 of the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate's First Branch
[Trial Court]Beijing Intellectual Property Court (Trademark Right Revocation Review Administrative Dispute Case, First Instance Effective)
[Judicial Summary]The original registrant of the trademark in question convened a shareholders' meeting to decide to dissolve the company and establish a liquidation group. After completing the liquidation, the company was approved for deregistration, and the trademark was inherited by the two shareholders and later transferred to Shandong * Alcohol Industry Company. Foshan * Commercial Company applied for revocation on the grounds that the trademark had not been used for three consecutive years. The China Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) reviewed the case and held that the company's deregistration and liquidation actions could be regarded as bankruptcy liquidation and constituted a legitimate reason for not using the trademark for three consecutive years, thus maintaining the registration. However, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court held that the decision confused the legal concepts of "bankruptcy liquidation" and "deregistration liquidation", made factual errors, and applied the law improperly. The court ruled to revoke the review decision and ordered the CNIPA to make a new review decision.
[Source]Beijing Municipal Intellectual Property Public Information Service Platform (Case of Administrative Dispute over Trademark Right Revocation Review Involving Foshan Commercial Company and National Intellectual Property Administration, with Shandong Wine Company as the Third Party) (2024-06)

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Attorney Liu Yuanyuan·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.