1. Updates to patent rules for artificial intelligence and computer programs

  1. Clarify that the claim subject is permissibleComputer Program ProductAdapted for AI, big data, and software algorithm inventions; allows parallel protection of apparatus, storage media, and program product claims.

  2. Strengthen ethical compliance review: Technical solutions involving personal data collection or violations of public order and good morals are considered non-eligible. For example, proposals to collect facial data without consent for marketing analysis will be rejected.

  3. Reviews are more heavily weightedTechnical Benefits, Real-World Use CasesIf an algorithm model or abstract logic lacks integration with hardware or business scenarios, the creative review will be more stringent.

2. New examination standards for the specialized chapter on traditional Chinese medicine

The Guidelines have been updated with a new Chapter 11, establishing examination criteria specifically for invention patents on traditional Chinese medicine.National Intellectual Property...：

  • Claims that methods such as obtaining medicine from living animals (e.g., bear bile extraction, ox gallstone collection) based on a doctor's prescription are not practical and therefore cannot be granted.National Intellectual Property。

  • Assess novelty and inventive step of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) while respecting TCM's pattern differentiation and treatment principles. Distinguish Western disease diagnoses from TCM syndromes; do not directly apply pharmaceutical examination logic used for Western medicines.

3. Further refinement of the "Three-Step" approach for inventive step examination

  1. Evaluate creativityComplete Technical Solution OverviewA single technical feature cannot be evaluated in isolation.National Intellectual Property...。

  2. for resolving technical issuesUnused featuresDoes not contribute to inventiveness. Merely adding shells, appearances, or conventional accessories cannot overcome inventive step deficiencies; simply listing irrelevant features is no longer an effective strategy for responding to office actions.

  3. Refine the standards for recognizing common general knowledge evidence. Examiners can now more readily cite textbooks and industry manuals as common general knowledge. When responding, enterprises must strengthen their evidence demonstrating unexpected technical effects achieved by the technology.

4. Optimization of application and fee refund policies

  1. Patent application entered substantive examination.Withdrawal before the deadline allows for a 50% refund of the substantive examination fee (excluding cases where a response has already been submitted).Reduce enterprise trial-and-error costsNational Intellectual Property。

  2. Utility model applications now support deferred examination for up to 1 years; design patent applications allow deferral in months, with a maximum of 36 months. The system also supports withdrawal of deferral requests, enabling strategic alignment with product launch schedules.National Intellectual Property。

  3. Clarify policy-based refund rules and streamline fee waivers and refund processes for greater transparency.

5. Major changes to invalidation proceeding rules

  1. Invalid: Cannot amend claims at this stage.Modifications may only be made to address invalid reasons or defects identified by the Collegial Panel.Redrafting the claims to create a completely new layout is not allowed. The scope of protection cannot be significantly expanded, and unrelated technical solutions cannot be arbitrarily added.

  2. Simplify notarization and authentication requirements for evidence from abroad by eliminating the requirement for notarization at Chinese embassies and consulates, thereby lowering the threshold for submitting foreign-related evidence.

  3. Flexible Review Methods: The Collegiate Panel may choose written proceedings, oral hearings, or a combination of both.

6. Rules for Simultaneous Filing of Invention and Utility Model Patent Applications

When the same applicant files both a utility model and an invention patent on the same day,You must proactively disclose mutual information during the application.To obtain a patent grant for the invention, you must relinquish the already-granted utility model. Failure to waive will result in direct rejection of the invention patent application. Non-response by the deadline will be treated as withdrawal of the application.

2. Impact on Corporate Patent Application Practices

  1. Request to improve writing standards

    Claims should focus on the innovative features that genuinely solve technical problems, avoiding excessive accumulation of irrelevant or non-contributory technical features. For algorithm and AI patents, the technical solution must be tightly integrated with hardware and business scenarios, emphasizing the description of technical effects.

  2. Increased patent risks in emerging fields

    For AI, big data, healthcare, and traditional Chinese medicine, ethical compliance and data compliance must be assessed alongside technical innovation. Without this, even novel technologies may be rejected due to subject matter issues.

  3. Adjustment of Response Strategy to Office Actions

    Respond to the Office Action on Inventive Step by providing more than just adding technical features. You must demonstrate the causal link between the added features and the technical problem being solved, with a focus on explaining the unexpected technical effects achieved.

  4. The same-day dual application strategy requires replanning.

    During the application phase, make a clear declaration and evaluate the technology lifecycle in advance to balance the trade-off between the faster grant of utility models and the long-term protection offered by invention patents.

  5. Invalid programs cannot rely on substantial amendments to the claims.Patent quality must be ensured during the drafting phase, not left entirely to the invalidation stage for corrections.

3. Practical Recommendations for Enterprises

  1. Patent mining phase: differentiateCore Innovation Features and Standard Add-on FeaturesPrioritize writing independent claims to cover innovations that provide actual technical effects.

  2. For AI, software, and big data patents, fully document the implementation scenarios and quantify technical effects in the specification to avoid purely abstract algorithm issues.

  3. For a concurrent invention and utility model application, ensure you select the mutual declaration option at submission and prepare a contingency plan to waive one of the rights later.

  4. When responding to Office Actions questioning inventive step, prioritize arguments based on technical problems, technical effects, and teachings in the prior art. Exercise caution when making amendments that merely add features without substantive changes.

  5. Strategize high-value patents by ensuring quality at the application source to minimize risks associated with post-filing amendments during reexamination and invalidation proceedings.