May 2025

1. The Sanyou trademark team won multiple awards for their studies in the "2024 Trademark Legal Frontier Issues Research Group"

In 2024, China Trademark Association organized experts from academia and IRP industry to establish 38 trademark research groups, which have produced high-quality works for two consecutive years. Each group focuses on cutting-edge issues in trademark law, covering exploration of emerging fields, theoretical system building, and research on practical difficulties. Using diversified research methods and data support, 43 high-quality research reports with theoretical depth and practical value have been produced.

At the research results release and exchange meeting held in Beijing in April 2025, China Trademark Association commended the outstanding reports and co-hosts selected. More than 150 representatives from courts, universities, research institutions, and IPR industry attended the event.

Several members of the Sanyou trademark team actively participated in multiple thematic studies, and the five reports they co-drafted stood out in the fierce evaluation, winning first, second, and third prizes.

(Sanyou Team)

He Wei, director of the trademark department of Sanyou, and senior attorney Meng Rubing have been recognized as an "excellent co-host" for their outstanding performance in team management, project promotion, and professional theory. At the press conference, He Wei, as a representative, shared her research results and insights during the sharing session.

(6th from left: Meng Rubing 5th from Right: He Wei)

During the conference, a launch ceremony for the "Zhongzhi Yingcai Trademark Knowledge AI Agent" was also held. Dang Xiaolin, General Manager of Sanyou, witnessed the release of the new technology with industry experts.

(3rd from right: Party DANG Xiaolin)

For a long time, the Sanyou trademark team has been dedicated to in-depth research and practice in trademark law, actively participating in industry exchanges and legal training, continuously promoting the optimization of trademark protection mechanisms, and committed to contributing wisdom and strength to the construction of China's trademark legal system.

2. Sanyou's cases have been selected as one of the top 10 typical cases of trademark litigation and non-litigation by the Beijing Trademark Association in 2024

Recently, the Beijing Trademark Association released the "Top 10 Typical Cases of Trademark Litigation and Top 10 Typical Cases of Trademark Non-litigation in Beijing in 2024", and the "龙集采" series of trademark invalidation administrative litigation cases represented by Sanyou were selected as one of the "Top 10 Typical Cases of Trademark Litigation in 2024"; The review of trademark rejection case of " swissbobbinet 及图" has been selected as one of the top 10 typical non-litigation cases for trademarks in 2024.

Non litigation case: review of TM rejection involving "swissbobbinet及图"

Sanyou client: SWISSTULLE AG

Hearing authority: CNIPA

Trial result: The application for trademark extension protection in China for designated use on goods of Class 24 and service of Class 40 in the review process has been approved.

Case introduction

In the case of "swissbobbinet及图", the applied trademark is designated for textiles of Class 24 and processing services of Class 40. The CNIPA believes that the trademark contains the word "SWISS", which is similar to the name of Switzerland, and cannot be registered without permission, and points out that "bobbinet" may be a descriptive term, lacking distinctiveness. On the one hand, Sanyou attorney guides the applicant to submit a notarized Swiss government consent letter, clarifying that they have obtained official authorization, thereby excluding the situations referred to in Article 10 (1) (2) of the Trademark Law;

On the other hand, from a practical perspective, a defense around the distinctiveness of the term "bobbinet" was given, citing authoritative dictionaries from Oxford and Cambridge, as well as multiple textile industry databases, to confirm that the term does not have a universal meaning in China, nor is it widely understood by the public as a product name or descriptive language, and can be used to identify the source of goods through trademark application. It has significant characteristics and does not constitute the situation referred to in Article 11 (1) (3) of the Trademark Law.

During the trial process, the Sanyou team argued with reason and accurately pointed out that the results of online translation cannot be used as a basis for claiming lack of distinctiveness, emphasizing that the evaluation should be based on official publications, industry standards, and consumer awareness. CNIPA finally recognized the evidence and legal logic submitted by Sanyou, and decided to grant extended protection of the trademark in China.

Typical significance

The victory in this case not only successfully broke through the two common rejection reasons of "similarity of country name" and "lack of distinctiveness", but also provided practical reference for the distinctiveness judgment in foreign trademark registration. The Sanyou team has demonstrated profound experience and rigorous strategies in handling complex trademark issues through a comprehensive understanding of legal provisions, authoritative materials, and trial trends.

3. The Status of Intellectual Property Judicial Protection in Chinese Courts (2024) and Summary of Typical Cases

The Supreme People's Court of China held a press conference during the World Intellectual Property Day Promotion Week on April 26, during which it released the The Status of Intellectual Property Judicial Protection in Chinese Courts (2024) and typical cases of intellectual property rights in Chinese courts in 2024. Key data on intellectual property cases are extracted as follows(Figure 1).

(Figure 1)

In 2024, China’s courts received 529370 new IPR cases (marking a year-on-year decrease of 2.67); concluded 543911 cases (marking a year-on-year increase of 0.001). The cases include: 449923 newly accepted IPR civil cases of first instance, and 457315 concluded cases, marking a decrease of 2.65 and 0.65 respectively. The proportion of new types of civil cases received is shown in Figure 2.

30486 newly accepted IPR civil cases of second instance were received, and 32055 cases were concluded.

(Figure 2)

20849 IPR cases of first instance of administrative litigation were received (marking an increase of 1.29), and 27745 cases were concluded (marking an increase of 24.19). The proportion of newly received administrative case types is shown in Figure 3.

11666 IPR cases of second instance of administrative litigation were received (marking an increase of 16.04), and 10874 cases were concluded (marking an increase of 17.44). Among them, 9420 original judgments were upheld, 1091 were revised, 2 were remanded for retrial, 207 were withdrawn, 4 were mediated, and 150 were others.

(Figure 3)

9120 IPR criminal cases of first instance were newly received (marking an increase of 24.34), and 9003 cases were concluded (marking an increase of 29.22). The proportion of newly received criminal case types is shown in Figure 4.

1112 new IPR criminal cases of second instance were received, and 1068 cases were concluded.

(Figure 4)

In 2024, the Supreme People's Court concluded 24,979 trademark administrative cases of first instance; 124,918 trademark civil cases of first instance; 31 cases were identified as constituting monopolies, marking a year-on-year increase of 2.1 times. 10000 cases of unfair competition, including infringement of trade secrets and collusion in bidding, have been concluded.

Punitive damages were applied by courts nationwide in 460 civil cases of IPR infringement, marking a year-on-year increase of 44.2. The Supreme People's Court applied punitive damages in accordance with the law in the "New Energy Vehicle Chassis" technology secret infringement case, and awarded a compensation amount of over RMB 640 million. This case has been selected as one of the "Top 10 Cases for Promoting the Rule of Law in the New Era in 2024".

Since its establishment 6 years ago, the Intellectual Property Court of the Supreme People's Court has concluded nearly 20,000 technical IPR appeal cases, of which 1,233 cases relate to strategic emerging industries, accounting for 32.3. Since 2021, the Supreme People's Court has lawfully concluded 37 cases of drug patent linkage appeals, effectively promoting the implementation of China's drug patent linkage system.