-
-
Services
-
-
28
2025-11
China Strengthens Scrutiny of Patent Invalidation Requests as CNIPA Rejects First Case Based on “Non-Genuine Intention”
Client Alert – November 2025
China’s patent invalidation practice has taken a decisive turn. On 15 November 2025, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) issued a landmark decision dismissing an invalidation request against AstraZeneca’s patent ZL201280033773.9. The dismissal was grounded on a finding that the request did not reflect the named petitioner’s genuine intention. This represents the first publicly reported case in which CNIPA has explicitly relied on the “non-genuine intention” principle to reject an invalidation request, and is widely viewed as an early implementation of the stricter standards embodied in the 2026 Patent Examination Guidelines.
The petitioner in this case, an individual named Wang Tailing, had no identifiable connection with the pharmaceutical industry. AstraZeneca questioned the legitimacy of the request, noting the petitioner’s background, the timing of the filing, and other irregularities that appeared inconsistent with an independent intention to challenge a complex pharmaceutical patent. More critically, AstraZeneca submitted a judicial appraisal demonstrating that the signature on the petitioner’s Power of Attorney was forged. CNIPA accepted this evidence and emphasized that forged authorization documents violate Article 45 of the Patent Law, which requires that an invalidation request be founded on the petitioner’s own belief that the patent fails to meet statutory requirements. CNIPA also stressed that subsequent ratification by the named individual cannot remedy the original illegality or reconstruct genuine intent retroactively.
Although the revised Patent Examination Guidelines will take effect on 1 January 2026, CNIPA’s reasoning in this case directly reflects the forthcoming standards. The Guidelines stipulate that CNIPA may dismiss invalidation requests that do not accurately reflect the petitioner's true intention. This indicates a broader policy shift toward strengthening procedural integrity, curbing the use of “straw man” petitioners, and ensuring that invalidation proceedings are not misused as tools for opaque commercial strategies. The decision also echoes recent trends in other cases, where CNIPA has begun scrutinizing whether the identified petitioner is the true actor behind the invalidation request.
This development has important implications for both patent owners and challengers. For patent owners, the decision provides an additional procedural basis to contest questionable invalidation requests, particularly where patterns suggest concealed interests, repeated filings from unrelated individuals, or inconsistencies in documentation. Patent owners may increasingly request CNIPA to examine the authenticity of the petitioner's intention when facing suspicious filings.
For challengers, the ruling underscores the need for heightened procedural compliance. Authentic execution of Power of Attorney documents, transparent disclosure of the true interested party, and avoidance of concealed proxy arrangements will become essential. Most significantly, the case highlights a fundamental shift: the identity of the petitioner is no longer a neutral procedural detail but a substantive factor subject to CNIPA scrutiny. Selecting a nominal, unrelated, or opaque individual as the petitioner may itself expose the filing to challenge. Companies contemplating invalidation actions in China must therefore exercise far greater caution in determining the filing entity.
Looking ahead, the AstraZeneca decision signals that China’s invalidation regime is entering a new phase characterized by strengthened procedural oversight, a higher threshold for demonstrating genuine intent, and reduced tolerance for strategic use of intermediary petitioners. As the 2026 Guidelines come into force, authenticity and transparency will become indispensable components of any invalidation strategy. Stakeholders are advised to reassess existing practices to ensure full alignment with CNIPA’s evolving expectations.
undefined
Contact Us
No. 93, Ganjiang West Rd., Suzhou, 215002, P.R.C.
Business Area
Follow Us
