As AI models become versatile and adaptable across multiple contexts and industries, questions about inventive step sit at the heart of patent examination in China. The 2023 Patent Examination Guidelines (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Guidelines’) included several sessions dedicated to explaining how inventive step should be examined for AI-related inventions, featuring examples related to AI algorithms, big data, and user experience1. In the re-examination of Beijing ByteDance Network Technology Co. Ltd.’s application entitled “Method and apparatus for processing an image” (Application No. 201810734681.2)2, which was recognized as one of the Top 10 Re-examination Cases of 2025 by the CNIPA, the CNIPA focused on the following issue: when an existing…
- AI, China, China Patent Office, CNIPA, Inventions, Inventiveness, Patent, Patent Re-examination and Invalidation Department, Patent Re-examination Board, Top 10 IP Case
- China, China Patent Office, CNIPA, data, Invalidation, Patent, Patent Law, Patent Re-examination Board, Patentability, Pharma, Support Requirements
How to Protect a Crystal Form (Polymorph) Patent in China
Crystalline forms are critical to pharmaceutical patents, offering extended protection for improved stability, bioavailability, or manufacturability. However, securing such patents in China has grown increasingly difficult due to the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)’s strict patentability criteria. Unlike the U.S. or Europe, where structural novelty or problem-solving utility may suffice, China demands quantifiable evidence of superiority over prior art forms and rejects patents based on routine screening alone. Recent decisions, like the invalidation of fruquintinib Crystal Form I, highlight common pitfalls: insufficient comparative data, incremental technical effects, and failures to preempt obviousness challenges. With China’s pharmaceutical market surging and secondary patents under heightened scrutiny, companies must strategically align their IP strategies…
-
AI is magical but NOT magic! Be specific in your AI patents!
What is the standard of sufficient disclosure for AI-related patents: A case study in China The rapid growth of AI patent applications present significant challenges to existing patent application and examination practices. One of them is satisfying the requirement for sufficient disclosure. The following case was featured in the 2023 CNIPA Compilation of Key Decisions on Patent Reexamination and Invalidation Cases (“2023 Compilation”) as an example to elucidate the current standards for sufficient disclosure in examining AI patent applications in China. Rejection of Alipay’s AI + Brainwave Patent The applicant Alipay1 had a Chinese Patent2 on an invention relating to a method and system that trains and utilizes AI models…




