Over the past decade, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (Beijing IP Court) has emerged as a key venue for resolving patent disputes in China. According to recently released official data, between November 2014 and October 2024, the court managed an astounding 194,000 cases with a relatively small team of approximately 72 judges, highlighting the significant workload and complexity of the cases reviewed. During this period, 852 administrative decisions were overturned, representing over 6.21% of all patent administrative cases concluded. However, the data does not clarify whether these overturned decisions pertain to patent re-examination or invalidation matters.
A sobering reality for challengers of CNIPA decisions
For patent applicants and challengers dissatisfied with re-examination or invalidation decisions from the CNIPA, these statistics present sobering odds. The relatively low reversal rate, combined with the heavy caseload of judges—who often handle matters spanning different technical fields—makes the Beijing IP Court a challenging venue for petitioners. Based on our experience, judges tend to exercise greater caution in granting reversals due to these obstacles. Consequently, only cases with exceptionally compelling reasons are likely to be considered for reversal.
Strategic takeaways for petitioners
These findings highlight three key lessons for petitioners considering appeals at the Beijing IP Court:
1. Appealing to the Beijing IP Court is often a long shot
Given the low reversal rate, appealing a CNIPA re-examination or invalidation decision may not be the most efficient use of resources. Petitioners should carefully assess their likelihood of success relative to the cost and time involved before proceeding.
2. Focus on CNIPA-level proceedings
Decisions made during the CNIPA’s re-examination or invalidation process often dictate the ultimate outcome. Petitioners must invest substantial effort and resources at this stage to develop a strong case, as overturning an unfavourable CNIPA decision in the Beijing IP court is challenging.
3. Success with appeals to Higher Courts are rare but possible
While success at the Beijing IP Court may be limited, there is still a chance to challenge decisions further in higher courts, such as the Supreme Court. At Ge Cheng IP, we have achieved favourable outcomes in a few of such appeals to higher courts. However, it’s crucial for petitioners to recognise that these are exceptional cases, requiring compelling evidence and strong legal arguments.
Final thoughts
For patent holders and applicants considering whether to challenge a CNIPA decision in the Beijing IP Court, strategic planning is crucial. While successes are possible, as shown by Ge Cheng IP’s experience, the investment of time, effort, and financial resources must be carefully weighed against the likelihood of a favourable outcome. Most importantly, securing a strong position during the CNIPA’s re-examination or invalidation process remains the most effective way to safeguard or challenge patent rights.
FICPI's view and involvement
FICPI uniquely combines education and advocacy on topics around patents and trade marks, with a focus on developing the professional excellence of its individual members. FICPI Forums, Congress, committees and meetings are opportunities to gather insights from the international IP attorney community on any issue, whether it be practice-related or topics of patent and trade mark law.
Next steps
- Search for FICPI members in China by navigating to the FICPI member directory and searching by country.
- Consider getting involved in FICPI Study & Work Groups, such as Group 3 (CET 3): International Patent Matters.