(Promulgated by Order No. 37 of the former State Administration for Industry and Commerce on November 2, 1995; Revised by Order No. 3 of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce on September 17, 2002 for the first time; and Revised by Order No. 20 of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce on September 26, 2005 for the second time.)

Chapter I General Provisions

Article 1 These Rules are formulated in accordance with the “Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the Trademark Law) and the “Regulation for the Implementation of the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China” (hereinafter referred to as the Implementation Regulation).

Article 2 In accordance with the Trademark Law and the Implementation Regulation Thereof, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (hereinafter referred to as Trademark Review and Hearing Board) shall take charge of the review and hearing of the following trademark cases:
(1) the cases in which a party is dissatisfied with the decision of the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (hereinafter referred to as the Trademark Office) on rejecting applications for trademark registration and applies for review in accordance with Article 32 of the Trademark Law;
(2) the cases in which a party is dissatisfied with the ruling of the Trademark Office concerning demurral and applies for review in accordance with Article 33 of the Trademark Law;
(3) the cases in which a party requests for a ruling on canceling a registered trademark in accordance with Article 41 of the Trademark Law; and
(4) the cases in which a party is dissatisfied with the decision made by the Trademark Office in accordance with Paragraph 1 of Article 41, Article 44 or Article 45 of the Trademark Law on canceling or sustaining a registered trademark and applies for review in accordance with Article 49 of the Trademark Law.

Article 3 The review and hearing of a case on a trademark dispute, which is attended by a party, shall be handled in written form.

Article 4 The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall adopt the written form when reviewing cases on trademark disputes, unless the case shall be reviewed and heard in public in accordance with Article 33 of the Implementation Regulation.

Article 5 The decisions and rulings made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board in accordance with the Trademark Law, the Implementation Regulation and these Rules shall be notified to the parties concerned in written form and the reasons therefor shall be explained.

Article 6 Unless otherwise prescribed in these Rules, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall adopt the collegial system when reviewing and hearing the cases on trademark disputes, and shall form a collegial panel composed of trademark review and hearing officers to review the cases.

Collegial panels shall apply the principle of decision by a majority vote in the review of cases.

Article 7 Where a party or an interested person applies for the withdrawal of a trademark review and hearing officer in accordance with Article 9 of the Implementation Regulation, it shall do so in written form and explain the reasons therefor.

Article 8 During the trademark review and hearing, a party shall have the right to, in accordance with the law, dispose of his own trademark right and the rights related to the trademark review and hearing. On the premise of considering public interests and the third party rights, both parties concerned may reach a reconciliation agreement between themselves in written form, and the Trademark Review and Hearing Board may also hold mediations in this regard.

Article 9 Where the co-owners of a trademark attends a trademark review and hearing activity, they shall designate a person as their representative. If no representative is designated, the trademark owner that comes first on the application letter for trademark registration or on the trademark registration book shall be the representative. The representative’s attending the review and hearing shall be binding on the parties he represents. However, the representative’s modification or abandonment of the review claims or the acceptance of the review claims of the opposing party must be subject to the written authorization of the parties he represents.

Article 10 A foreigner or foreign enterprise that intends to handle a trademark review and hearing may, if having a habitual residence or business place in China, either authorize an organization with the state-accredited qualification to serve as his/its agent to handle the matter, or it may directly handle the matter by himself/itself; or shall, if having no habitual residence or business place in China, authorize an organization with state-accredited qualification to serve as his/its agent to handle the matter.

Where the scope of authorized power is modified, the agency relationship is rescinded or the agent is changed, the party concerned or the agent shall timely inform the Trademark Review and Hearing Board in writing.

Article 11 A party and its agent may apply for consulting the materials related to the case.

Chapter II Application and Acceptance

Article 12 Whoever applies for trademark review and hearing shall meet the following conditions:
(1) The applicant must have the legal status as a subject;
(2) The application shall be filed within the legal time limit;
(3) The application shall fall within the scope of review and hearing of the Trademark Review and Hearing Board;
(4) The applicant shall legally submit the application letter and the relevant evidential materials conforming to the provisions;
(5) There are clear review claims, factual basis and reasons; and
(6) The applicant shall pay the review and hearing fee in accordance with the law.

Article 13 Whoever applies for trademark review and hearing shall submit an application letter to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board. If there are respondents, the applicant shall submit as many duplicates of the application letter as the respondents. If the applicant has filed an application to the Trademark Office after its trademark is assigned or transferred, but the application has not been ratified for publishing, it shall provide corresponding proof documents; and if the applicant applies for review on the basis of the Trademark Office’s letter of decision or letter of ruling, it shall, concurrently, attach the Trademark Office’s letter of decision or letter of ruling, in addition.

Article 14 An application letter shall state the following particulars:
(1) The name, domicile, correspondence address, contact person and telephone of the applicant. If the application for review involves any respondent, it shall state the respondent’s name and domicile. If a trademark agency organization is authorized to attend the trademark review, the application shall state the name, correspondence address, contact person and telephone of the trademark agency organization;
(2) The trademark under dispute, its application number or preliminary approval number, registration number, and the issue number of the Trademark Gazette on which the trademark was published; and
(3) Specific review claims and the corresponding facts, reasons and legal basis.

Article 15 Where an application for trademark review and hearing fails to meet any of the conditions prescribed in Items (1), (2) and (3) of Article 12 of these Rules, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall refuse to accept it, notify the applicant in writing, and explain the reasons therefor.

Article 16 Where an application for trademark review and hearing fails to meet any of the conditions as prescribed in Items (4), (5) and (6) of Article 12 of these Rules, or the applicant fails to submit the relevant proof documents in accordance with the Implementation Regulation and these Rules, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall send a notification for supplements and corrections to the applicant, demanding the applicant to make supplements and corrections within 30 days as of receipt of the notification.

If the application still fail to meet the legal provisions making supplements and corrections, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall refuse to accept the application, notify the applicant in writing, and explain the reasons therefor. If no supplement or correction is made within the time limit, it shall be deemed as if the applicant has withdrawn the application for review and hearing in accordance with Article 30 of the Implementation Regulation, and the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall notify the applicant in writing.

Article 17 Where an application for trademark review and hearing is found to meet the conditions for acceptance upon examination, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall send a Notification of Acceptance to the applicant within 30 days.

Article 18 Where an application for trademark review and hearing which has been accepted by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board is under any of the following circumstances, it shall be deemed to fail to meet the conditions for acceptance, and shall be rejected in accordance with Article 30 of the Implementation Regulation:
(1) As in violation of Article 42 of the Trademark Law, the applicant applies, with the same facts and reasons, for a ruling on a trademark about which it has proposed demurral before the trademark is ratified for registration and has been ruled;
(2) As in violation of Article 35 of the Trademark Law, the applicant files an application for review and hearing for a second time with the same facts and reasons after withdrawing an application for trademark review and hearing;
(3) As in violation of Article 35 of the Trademark Law, to the applicant files an application for review and hearing, for a second time with the same facts and reasons, on a ruling or decision which has been made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board; and
(4) Other circumstances under which the application fails to meet the conditions for acceptance.

The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, when rejecting an application for trademark review and hearing, notify the applicant in writing, and explain the reasons therefor.

Article 19 Where an application for review and hearing involves any respondent, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, after acceptance of the application, timely serve a counterpart of the application letter and the relevant evidential materials to the respondent, demanding the respondent to submit a defense to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board within 30 days as of receipt of the counterpart of the application letter, and to submit as many counterparts of the defense as there are applicants. If the respondent fails to submit a defense within the time limit, it shall be deemed to waive the right to defense.

Article 20 Where a party needs to supplement the relevant evidential materials after filing the application for review and hearing or the defense, it shall make a declaration in the application or defense, and shall, within 3 months as of submitting the application or defense, submit, once and for all, the same number of copies of the evidential materials as the number of copies of the application or defense. If it fails to make a declaration in the application or defense, or fails to submit evidential materials within the time limit, it shall be deemed to have abandoned the supplementation of the relevant evidential materials, unless the evidence is formed on the basis of new facts after expiry of the time limit or there is indeed any other justifiable reason.

Where, with respect to the evidential materials provided by a party within the legal time limit, there is an opposing party, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall send the evidential materials to the opposing party, and demanding the opposing party to make cross-examination of the evidences within a specified time limit.

Article 21 The applicant shall, when submitting an application, or the respondent shall, when submitting a defense, concurrently submit an effective certificate which may prove its identity. The name of the applicant or respondent shall be consistent with the certificate it submits.

Where a party’s name, domicile or other particular is modified, this party shall provide corresponding proof documents.

Article 22 A party shall classify and number the evidential materials it submits, make a checklist to brief the sources of the evidential materials and the specific facts proved thereby, and shall sign and affix a seal on that checklist.

The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, after receipt of the evidential materials submitted by the party, check them according to the checklist. The handler shall sign in the evidential materials and indicate the date of submission on the acknowledgement of receipt.

Article 23 The application for trademark review and hearing and the relevant evidential materials shall be filled out or provided according to the prescribed format and requirements. If they are not filled out or provided according to the prescribed format and requirements, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall send the applicant a notification for supplement and correction, demanding it to make supplements and corrections within 30 days as of receipt of the notification. If the application still does not conform to the legal provisions after supplement and correction or the applicant fails to make the supplement and correction within the time limit, Paragraph 2 of Article 16 of these Rules shall apply.

The defense letter and the relevant evidential materials in trademark review and hearing shall be filled out or provided according to the prescribed format and requirements. If they are not filled out or provided according to the prescribed format and requirements, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall send the applicant a notification for supplement and correction, demanding it to make supplements and corrections within 30 days as of receipt of the notification. If the application still does not conform to the legal provisions after supplement and correction or the applicant fails to make the supplement and correction within the time limit, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board’s review and hearing shall not be affected.

Chapter III Review

Article 24 The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall form a collegial panel to review a case subject to trademark review and hearing. The collegial panel shall be composed of 3 trademark review and hearing officers or of an odd number above 3. However, in case any of the following circumstances arises, the case may be reviewed and heard by a single trademark review and hearing officer:
(1) The trademark cited by the Trademark Office in a rejection decision or a demurral ruling has lost the exclusive right or the prior right at the time of review;
(2) The trademark in request for ruling of cancellation has lost the exclusive right;
(3) The trademark cited by the Trademark Office in the rejection decision is owned by the applicant, but is rejected by the Trademark Office since the applicant failed to timely go through the procedures for modification, and by the time of review, the applicant has applied to the Trademark Office for accomplishing the procedures for modification;
(4) The trademark for which any other person has filed an application or which has been registered by any other person and is cited by the Trademark Office in the rejection decision but has been ratified at the time of review to be assigned to the applicant; and
(5) Any other case that may be reviewed and heard by a single trademark review and hearing officer.

Article 25 Where a party or interested person applies for the withdrawal of any trademark review and hearing officer in accordance with Article 9 of the Implementation Regulation or Article 7 of these Rules, the trademark review and hearing officer against whom the application for withdrawal is filed shall, before the Trademark Review and Hearing Board makes a decision on whether or not to approve the withdrawal, be suspended from participating in the review of the present case.

Where the Trademark Review and Hearing Board receives the application for withdrawal filed by a party or interested person after the decision or ruling has been made, the validity of the review decision or ruling shall not be affected. However, if there indeed exists any circumstance under which the review and hearing officer ought to withdraw, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall deal with the matter in accordance with the law.

Article 26 With respect to an application for withdrawal filed by a party, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, within 7 days as of receipt of the application, make a decision in written form, and notify the applicant in writing. If the applicant is dissatisfied with the non-withdrawal decision made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board, it may apply for reconsideration within 3 days as of receipt of the decision. During the reconsideration, the trademark review and hearing officer against whom the application for withdrawal is filed shall not be suspended from participating in the review of the present case. The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, within 3 days, make a decision of reconsideration, and notify the applicant for reconsideration in writing.

Article 27 The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, with respect to a review case in which a party is dissatisfied with the Trademark Office’s decision on rejecting the application for trademark registration, review the Trademark Office’s rejection decision, the facts and reasons for the applicant to apply for review, the review claims, and the factual state at the time of review in addition to applying Articles 10, 11, and 12 and Paragraph 1 of Article 16 of the Trademark Law. The Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall listen to the applicant’s opinions before making a review decision in accordance with the aforementioned provisions in this Article.

Article 28 In the review of a case in which a party is dissatisfied with the Trademark Office’s ruling of demurral, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall review the facts, reasons and claims as described in the party’s application for review and defense.

Article 29 In the review of a case in which a party claims, in accordance with Article 41 of the Trademark Law, for a ruling on the cancellation of a registered trademark, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall review the facts, reasons and claims as described in the party’s application for review and defense.

Article 30 In the review of a case in which a party is dissatisfied with a decision made by the Trademark Office in accordance with Paragraph 1 of Article 41 of the Trademark Law on the cancellation of a registered trademark, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall review the Trademark Office’s decision as well as the facts, reasons and claims as described in the party’s application for review and defense.

In the review of a case in which a party is dissatisfied with a decision made by the Trademark Office in accordance with Article 44 or 45 of the Trademark Law on canceling or sustaining a registered trademark, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall review the facts, reasons and legal basis for the Trademark Office to make the decision on canceling or sustaining the registered trademark, unless the party in the case who applies for review in accordance with Item (4) of Article 44 of the Trademark Law needs to supplement evidence and has the justifiable reason.

Article 31 Where, in the process of trademark review and hearing, a party’s trademark right is assigned or transferred, the assignee or transferee shall timely declare in writing of its status of the assignor or transferor, attend the follow-up review procedures, and bear corresponding consequences of the review.

Article 32 In case any of the following circumstances arises, the review shall be terminated:
(1) The applicant has died and there is no inheritor or the inheritor abandons the right of review after termination;
(2) The applicant withdraws the application for review;
(3) The parties hold reconciliation between themselves or reach an agreement after the mediation of the Trademark Review and Hearing Board; and
(4) Other circumstances under which the review ought to be terminated.

Where the review is terminated, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall finalize the case, notify the parties concerned in writing and explain the reasons therefor.

Article 33 The collegial panel shall make transcripts for their hearings of the case it has reviewed, to which the panel members shall affix their signatures. If any panel member has any different opinion, such different opinion shall be truthfully put into the transcripts.

With regard to a case finalized from review, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall make a decision or ruling in accordance with the law.

Article 34 The decision or ruling made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall state the following contents:
(1) the review claims, facts under dispute, and the reasons therefor;
(2) the facts, reasons and the applicable legal basis ascertained in the decision or ruling;
(3) the conclusion of the decision or ruling;
(4) the follow-up procedures and time limit available to the party concerned; and
(5) the date when the decision or ruling is made.

The decision or ruling shall be signed by the collegial panel members with their names, and be affixed with a seal of the Trademark Review and Hearing Board.

Article 35 Where a party is dissatisfied with a decision or ruling made by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board and brings a lawsuit to the people’s court, it shall, either at the time of submitting the bill of complaint to the people’s court or no later than 15 days thereafter, send a copy of the counterpart of the bill of complaint to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board or separately inform the Board in writing.

Where the Trademark Review and Hearing Board does not receive any decision-related or ruling-related lawsuit information from the people’s court or any party in this case within 60 days as of the day when the decision or ruling was delivered, it shall be deemed as the party concerned has never brought a lawsuit to the court, and the said decision or ruling shall be transferred to the Trademark Office for enforcement.

Article 36 The Trademark Review and Hearing Board may, upon request of a party or when the actual situation so requires, decide to review the application in public.

Article 37 Where a party requests a review in public, it shall propose the specific reason for holding the review in public.

Article 38 Where an applicant requests for a review in public, it shall, within 15 days as of receipt of the counterpart of the respondent’s defense, propose the request to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board in writing; while if the respondent requests for a review in public, it shall propose the request when submitting the defense or supplementing relevant evidential materials to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board.

Article 39 The specific procedures for public review shall be separately prescribed by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board.

Chapter IV Rules on Evidence

Article 40 A party shall provide evidence to prove the facts on which its review claims are based or the facts on which the refutation against the opposing party’s review claims is based. If there is no evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove the factual arguments of the party, the party with the burden of proof shall bear the adverse results.

Where either party explicitly acknowledges the facts stated by the other party, the latter need not produce any evidence.

Where neither party acknowledges or denies the facts stated by the other party, those facts shall be deemed as being acknowledged.

Where a party entrusts an agent to attend the review, the acknowledgement made by the agent shall be deemed as that of the party, except for the acknowledgement made by an agent without special authorization and directly leading to acknowledgement of the review claims of the opposing party. If the party is on the scene but does not deny the acknowledgement made by his agent, it shall be deemed as this party has made the acknowledgement.

Article 41 A party need not produce evidence to prove the following facts, unless the other party has contrary evidence sufficient to reverse such facts:
(1) The facts known to all;
(2) The facts deduced from legal provisions;
(3) The facts proved in accordance with the law;
(4) The facts established on the basis of daily life experiences; and
(5) Other facts that need not be proved by evidence in accordance with law

Article 42 When submitting documentary evidence to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board, a party shall provide the original documents, including the originals, the reserved copy and the counterparts. If it is difficult to provide the original documents, the party may provide corresponding photocopies, photos or extracts; if the party provides duplications, photocopies or excerpts of the original documentary evidence which are kept by the relevant department, the source shall be indicated, and the said department shall affix its seal after making sure they are identical.

When providing physical evidence to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board, a party shall provide the original articles. If it is difficult to provide the original articles, the party may provide corresponding duplications, or the photos, video recordings or other evidence that can prove this physical evidence; if the original articles are unspecified things in a large quantity, only part of them need be provided.

Where either party has any doubt on the duplications or photos, etc. of the documentary or physical evidence provided by the other party, and has corresponding evidence to support its doubt, or the Trademark Review and Hearing Board considers necessary, the oppugned party shall provide or show the originals of the relevant evidence or notarized photocopies.

Article 43 Where the evidence provided by a party to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board is formed outside the People’s Republic of China, or formed in the region of Hong Kong, Macao or Taiwan, and the opposing party has any doubt on the authenticity of the evidence and has corresponding evidence to support its doubt, or the Trademark Review and Hearing Board considers necessary, the party that provides the evidence shall go through the corresponding procedures for public notification and for certification in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.

Article 44 Where a party provides the Trademark Review and Hearing Board with documentary evidence or explanation materials in any foreign language, a Chinese translation shall be attached. If the party providing the evidence in a foreign language fails to attach a Chinese translation, such foreign language evidence shall be deemed as having not been submitted.

Where the opposing party has any demurral against any specific content of the translation, it shall submit a Chinese translation to that party against which it has demurral. It may, when necessary, entrust an entity recognized by both parties to translate the full text, or the part used, or the part containing the demurral.

Where both parties fail to reach an agreement on the entrustment of translation, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board may designate a professional translation entity to translate the full text, the part used, or the part containing the demurral. The expenses needed for the entrustment of translation shall be equally borne by both parties; if either party refuses to pay the expenses for translation, it shall be deemed as if this party acknowledges the translation submitted by the opposing party.

Article 45 The existence and degree of probative force of a single evidence may be examined from the following aspects:
(1) Whether the evidence is the original piece or article, and whether the photocopy or duplication matches the original piece or article;
(2) Whether the evidence is relevant to the facts of the case in question;
(3) Whether the form and source of the evidence conforms to the legal provisions;
(4) Whether the contents of the evidence are true; and
(5) Whether the witness or the person providing the evidence has any interest relation with either party.

Article 46 The review and hearing officers shall make a comprehensive examination and judgment of all the evidence of the case from the aspects such as the relevance of the evidence with the facts, and the connection between different pieces of evidence, etc.

Article 47 The following evidence may not be taken alone as the basis for ascertaining the facts of the case:
(1) the testimony given by a minor that does not correspond to his/her age and intelligence;
(2) the testimony, which is favorable for one party, given by a witness who is a relative, subordinate of or has other close relations with that party, or the testimony, which is unfavorable for one party, given by a witness who has unfavorable relations with that party;
(3) the testimony given by a witness who shall testify at the public review but fails to do so without any justifiable reason;
(4) the audiovisual materials that are hard to identify whether they have been modified;
(5) the photocopy or duplicates that cannot be verified against the original piece or article;
(6) the evidential materials which have been modified by one party or by others and are not recognized by the opposing party; and
(7) other evidential materials that cannot be taken alone as the basis for ascertaining the facts of the case.

Article 48 Where, with respect to any of the following evidence presented by one party, the opposing party proposes a demurral but lacks sufficient contrary evidence to refute, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall confirm the probative force of that evidence:
(1) the original piece of the documentary evidence, or the photocopy, photo, counterpart or excerpt which has been verified to be identical with the original piece;
(2) the original article of physical evidence, or the duplicate, photo, or video recording which has been verified to be identical with the original article;
(3) the audiovisual reference material that is corroborated by other evidence and is obtained by lawful means, or the duplicate which has been verified to match the audiovisual material.

Article 49 Where, with respect to the authentication conclusion made by an authenticating department entrusted by one party, the opposing party lacks sufficient contrary evidence and reasons to refute, the probative force of that conclusion shall be confirmed.

Article 50 Where the evidence provided by one party is recognized by the other party or the contrary evidence provided by the other party is insufficient to refute the former evidence, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board may confirm the probative force of the former evidence.

Where, with respect to the evidence provided by one party, the other party proposes any demurral and provides refuting evidence, and the refuting evidence is recognized by the former party, the probative force of such refuting evidence may be confirmed.

Article 51 Where both parties respectively provide conflicting evidence regarding a same fact and neither of them has sufficient basis to refute the evidence provided by the other, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall, in light of the circumstances of the case, judge whether the probative force of the evidence provided by one party obviously exceeds that by the other party, and shall confirm the evidence with the larger probative force.

Where it is difficult to ascertain the facts under dispute due to the fact that it is impossible to decide the probative force of the evidence, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall decide it according to the principle of the distribution of burden of proof.

Article 52 Where, in the process of review, one party acknowledges the facts unfavorable to itself and recognizes the evidence in its application, defense, its own statements or of the authorized agent thereof, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall confirm such facts and evidence, unless the party goes back on his words and has sufficient contrary evidence to reverse such facts and evidence.

Article 53 Where a party is unable to provide other relevant evidence besides his statements for his argument, that argument shall not be supported, unless the argument is accepted by the opposing party.

Article 54 The Trademark Review and Hearing Board may determine the probative force of several pieces of evidence for a same fact according to the following principles:
(1) The official documents produced by state organs and other functional departments based on their powers shall prevail over other documentary evidence;
(2) The authentication conclusions, archival materials, and notarized or registered documentary evidence shall prevail over other documentary evidence, audiovisual reference materials and testimony of witnesses;
(3) The original document or article shall prevail over the photocopy or duplicate;
(4) The authentication conclusions made by legal authenticating departments shall prevail over those made by other authenticating departments;
(5) The primary evidence shall prevail over derivative evidence;
(6) The testimony provided by other witnesses shall prevail over the testimony which is favorable to the party and provided by the witnesses who are relatives or have other close relations with that party;
(7) The testimony of the witnesses who have testified at the public review shall prevail over that of the witnesses who have not done so; and
(8) The evidence of several different kinds but whose contents are consistent with each other shall prevail over a single piece of evidence.

Chapter V Term and Service

Article 55 Terms shall include legal terms and terms designated by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board.

A term shall be calculated by the day, month and year. The day on which a term commences shall not be included in that term.

If the last day of a term falls on a holiday, the first workday following that holiday shall be regarded as the expiry date.

Article 56 With respect to the date of submitting documents or materials by a party to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board, in the case of direct delivery, the date of delivery shall be the date of submission; in the case of delivery by mail, the date of mailing indicated by the postmark shall be the date of submission; if the date of mailing indicated by the postmark is unclear or there is no postmark, the date on which the Trademark Review and Hearing Board actually receives the documents or materials shall be the date of submission, unless the party can provide evidence to prove the actual date of mailing.

Article 57 The various documents of the Trademark Review and Hearing Board may be served to the parties by mail, direct delivery or by other means. If a party has entrusted an organization of trademark agency, the documents shall be deemed as having been served to the party if it has been served to that organization.

With respect to the date of service of various documents to the parties by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board, in the case of mail delivery, the date of receipt by the party indicated by the postmark shall be the date of service; if the date indicated by the postmark is unclear or there is no postmark, or the mail has not been returned by the post office, the documents shall be deemed as having been served to the party on the 15th day from the day of sending; in the case of direct delivery, the day of delivery shall be the date of service. If the documents are unable to be mailed or directly delivered, they may be served to the parties through pubic announcements, and such documents shall be deemed as being served on the 30th day from the date of promulgation of the public announcement

Article 58 Where a party is a foreigner or foreign enterprise that has no permanent residence or business place in the People’s Republic of China, the trademark agency organization stated in his/its trademark registration archives shall bear the obligation of signing in the relevant legal documents concerning this trademark as prescribed in the trademark review and hearing procedures. Such documents shall be deemed as being served to the party once the Trademark Review and Hearing Board has served the relevant legal documents to this trademark agency organization.

Where the trademark agency organization has rescinded the trademark agency relation with the foreign party prior to the service of the relevant legal documents as mentioned in the preceding paragraph, it shall explain the relevant facts to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board in written form, and shall, within 10 days as of receipt of the documents, return the relevant legal documents to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board, and the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall serve them in a separate way.

Where a trademark of Madrid international registration involves relevant written documents transmitted by the International Bureau, corresponding evidence of service shall be submitted. In the case of failure to submit such evidence, the reason therefor shall be explained in writing, and such documents shall be deemed as being served on the 15th day as of the day when they are sent by the International Bureau.

Where the documents are unable to be served by any of the abovementioned means, they shall be served through pubic announcements.

Chapter VI Supplementary Provisions

Article 59 In the circumstances listed in Articles 4, 5 and 8, Paragraph 1 of Article 9, Items (1), (3) and (4) of Paragraph 1 of Article 10, Paragraph 2 of Article 10, Articles 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 24, 25 and 31 of the Trademark Law, as amended, which occurred prior to the entry into force of the Decision on Revising the Trademark Law on December 1, 2001, and are reviewed by the Trademark Review and Hearing Board after that date, the review and hearing shall be made in accordance with the corresponding provisions of the Trademark Law, as amended. In other circumstances, the Trademark Review and Hearing Board shall make the review and hearing in accordance with the corresponding provisions of the Trademark Law before it was amended.

Where the parties dispute over a trademark which has been registered for one year or longer before the Decision on Amending the Trademark Law came into force, and either of them applies to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board for review and hearing, the time limit for filing an application as prescribed in Paragraph 2 of Article 27 of the Trademark Law before it was amended shall apply; where the parties dispute over a trademark which has been registered for less than one year before the Decision on Revising the Trademark Law came into force, and apply to the Trademark Review and Hearing Board for review and hearing, the time limit for filing an application as prescribed in Paragraph 3 of Article 41 of the revised Trademark Law shall apply.

Where, before the Decision on Revising the Trademark Law came into force, a relevant entity or individual files an application in accordance with Article 27 of the Trademark Law before it was amended and Article 25 of the Implementation Regulation thereof for review and hearing, and falls within the circumstances listed in Articles 13, 15, 16 and 31 of the Trademark Law, as amended, the time limit for filing the application as prescribed in Paragraph 2 of Article 41 of the Trademark Law, as amended, shall not apply.

Article 60 The specimens of the documents for handling trademark review and hearing shall be formulated and promulgated by the State Administration for Industry and Commerce.

Article 61 The power and responsibility to interpret these Rules shall remain with the State Administration for Industry and Commerce.

Article 62 These Rules shall come into force on October 26, 2005.