Trademark Wiki / 专业术语

Partial Refusal

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

A partial refusal is CNIPA's handling of an application in which some designated goods or service items are refused while the remaining portion is preliminary approved; the applicant may choose division or refusal review.

A partial refusal means that, after substantive examination of a trademark registration application, CNIPA determines that some of the designated goods or service items should be refused while preliminary approving the remainder. It corresponds to the Notification of Partial Refusal of Trademark Registration Application. Upon receiving this document, the applicant has two main paths: division or refusal review; the applicant may also choose neither division nor review and accept the non-registration of some items.

Legal Basis

  • Article 30 of the Trademark Law: a trademark identical or similar to a registered or preliminary approved trademark on identical or similar goods, or otherwise non-compliant with the relevant provisions of this Law, shall be refused by CNIPA;
  • Article 34 of the Trademark Law: a party dissatisfied with the refusal of an application and withholding of publication may apply to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board for review within fifteen days of receiving the notice;
  • Article 22 of the Implementing Regulations: where CNIPA refuses part of the designated goods of a trademark registration application, the applicant may divide the preliminary approved portion of the application into a separate application, which retains the filing date of the original application; where division is needed, the division application shall be filed within fifteen days of receiving the Notification of Partial Refusal of Trademark Registration Application.

Path One: Division Application

The preliminary approved portion is separated from the original application and becomes an independent application:

  • It retains the original filing date, so prior status is unaffected;
  • CNIPA divides the original application into two, generates a new application number for the divided-out preliminary approved portion, and publishes it for announcement;
  • The refused portion remains in the original application and may still be separately challenged by refusal review within the time limit.

The core value of division is "letting the approved part go first": uncontested classes or items enter announcement and certification as quickly as possible, without waiting for the review of the refused portion to conclude.

Path Two: No Division, Direct Review of the Refused Portion

  • Without division, the refusal review targets the items refused in the original application;
  • If the review succeeds, the refused items resume examination and may obtain registration;
  • If the review fails, the original refusal takes effect and the refused items no longer proceed to registration;
  • With neither review nor division, the refused items are treated as refused, while the preliminary approved portion still proceeds to announcement and the registration certificate is issued.

In other words, not dividing does not necessarily affect certification of the approved portion—it is only that the timing will be held up by the procedure.

How to Choose Between the Two Paths

  • Speed to certificate: division has the advantage. The preliminary approved portion proceeds to announcement and certification independently, unencumbered by the review cycle; without division, the approved portion usually waits for the fate of the refused portion;
  • Procedural complexity: no division is simpler—one application against one review; after division, the same trademark corresponds to two applications, and subsequent changes, assignments, and renewals must be handled separately;
  • Cost: division adds a procedure and corresponding fees; without division, a failed review may mean wasted waiting time;
  • Timing: both the division application and the refusal review must be filed within fifteen days of receiving the partial refusal notice; in practice, the division is often checked and filed together with the review application, completing both in one motion.

The criterion can be very direct: does the approved portion need a certificate quickly for platform filing, bidding, or evidence collection in enforcement? If yes, divide; if it will not be used for some time and simpler procedures are preferred, do not divide.

Practical Points and Common Pitfalls

  • The fifteen-day deadline is hard: the division application and the review application share these fifteen days, counted from receipt of the notice; where the last day falls on a holiday, it extends to the first working day after the holiday;
  • What is divided is the preliminary approved portion—do not mistakenly believe the refused items can be divided out separately;
  • Pitfall one: believing that something must be done after a partial refusal, otherwise the whole application is void. The preliminary approved portion usually continues through the procedures;
  • Pitfall two: treating division and review as mutually exclusive. They solve different problems and can be used together;
  • Pitfall three: ignoring the value of the refused items themselves. If the refused items are precisely the core business scope, the value of review may exceed that of racing for time.

How these concepts apply in specific cases still involves detailed differences; you may consult a registered agent via MyTMBee for case-specific analysis.