Trademark Wiki / 专业术语

Opposition Defense

TermPublished 2026-09-17 · Updated 2026-09-17

An opposition defense is the written response submitted by the opposed party to the opponent's grounds, and must be completed within thirty days of receiving the copy of the opposition materials.

An opposition defense is the written response submitted by the opposed party to CNIPA within the statutory time limit after its trademark has been opposed. The core task of the defense is not to prove that one did nothing wrong, but to dismantle the opponent's grounds and evidence point by point, pulling the scales of examination back to one's own side. Failure to respond within the deadline does not prevent CNIPA from making a decision, but it forfeits the most important opportunity to be heard in the proceeding.

Legal Basis and Time Limit

Article 33 of the Trademark Law governs the filing of opposition, and Article 35 requires CNIPA to hear the facts and grounds stated by both the opponent and the opposed party.

Article 27 of the Implementing Regulations further clarifies: CNIPA shall promptly send the opposed party a copy of the opposition materials, limiting it to thirty days from receipt of the copy to respond; failure to respond does not affect CNIPA's decision.

The same article provides that where a party needs to supplement evidence materials after filing an opposition or a defense, it shall state this in the opposition application or the defense and submit the materials within three months of filing; failure to submit upon expiry is deemed abandonment of the supplementary materials. This provision is often overlooked: if the defense does not declare an intent to supplement evidence, subsequently submitted materials may not be accepted.

The Basic Defense Procedure

  1. Receive the copy of the opposition materials forwarded by CNIPA and confirm the preliminary approval number of the opposed trademark, the grounds of opposition, and the evidence;
  2. Submit the defense within thirty days, stating the response to each ground of opposition;
  3. Declare in the defense the evidence to be supplemented and complete it within three months;
  4. CNIPA examines the matter and makes a decision either approving registration or refusing registration.

Defense Points

  • Verify the opponent's standing: where the opponent raises relative grounds, first examine whether it is a prior rights holder or an interested party; improper standing is an independent defense point;
  • Respond point by point: every ground in the opposition brief must be answered separately; parts left unanswered may be treated as conceded;
  • Targeted proof: accused of squatting? Provide the earliest use time, scope of use, and advertising expenditure of your own trademark. Accused of lacking distinctiveness? Provide evidence of acquired distinctiveness through use. Accused of a bad-faith application? Provide materials showing genuine operations and intent to use;
  • Distinguish trademark similarity from similarity of goods: argue that the trademarks are distinguishable in sound, form, and meaning, or that the goods are not similar in function, intended purpose, sales channels, or consumers;
  • Emphasize that coexistence will not cause confusion: provide materials showing long-term coexistence, market segmentation, and absence of consumer misidentification.

How to Organize the Evidence

Evidence should form a chronological chain, not a scattered pile:

  • Earliest use evidence: first contracts, delivery notes, invoices, packaging design drafts, and notarized documents bearing the trademark;
  • Continuous use evidence: sales contracts and invoices by year, e-commerce back-end data, exhibition materials;
  • Fame evidence: advertising placement records, media reports, industry rankings, and awards;
  • Good-faith evidence: registration of one's own trade name, copyright registration, design patents, and an explanation of the original design of the trademark.

Screenshots of e-commerce orders and exported back-end data should, where possible, be accompanied by certificates issued by the platform or notarization, otherwise their probative force is easily challenged.

Common Pitfalls

  • Treating the defense as a formality and submitting nothing;
  • Submitting a pile of contracts without explanation, incapable of corresponding to specific grounds;
  • Missing the thirty-day deadline, or forgetting to declare supplementary evidence in the defense;
  • Responding to only some grounds and ignoring those not accepted.

The consequence of a failed defense is refusal of registration; while a request for review of non-registration is still available, the review stage must again face constraints on the time limit for supplementing evidence. If you lack confidence in the opposition defense, engaging an agency with review experience is more prudent.

The application of these concepts in practice varies in detail; before proceeding, you may consult a registered agent via MyTMBee for targeted analysis.