The Measures for the Administration of Priority Examination of Patents, reviewed and adopted at the 4th Bureau Affairs Meeting on July 16, 2026, is hereby promulgated and shall come into force on September 1, 2026.

Shen Changyu Director General
July 28, 2026

Measures for the Administration of Priority Examination of Patents

                                                                                                                  Chapter 1 General Provisions

Article 1 These Measures are formulated in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Patent Law) and the Implementing Rules of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Implementing Rules of the Patent Law), for the purposes of further advancing the development of a powerful intellectual property country and regulating priority examination of patents.

Article 2 Priority examination of patents shall uphold the Party's leadership, pursue high-quality development, help optimize the business environment, underpin the development of new quality productive forces, and advance the development of an innovative country.

Article 3 The National Intellectual Property Administration shall be responsible for the administration of priority examination of patents, accept and examine requests for priority examination, strengthen the guarantee of examination resources, and improve examination quality and efficiency. Provincial intellectual property administrations shall be responsible for recommending requests for priority examination within their respective administrative regions.

The National Intellectual Property Administration may accept requests for priority examination recommended by relevant competent departments of the State Council in accordance with these Measures.

                                                                                                                Chapter 2 Applicable Conditions

Article 4 These Measures shall apply to priority examination of the following patent applications or cases:
(1) Invention patent applications in the substantive examination phase where no initial action has been taken. The term "initial action" means that an examiner has commenced examination and issued an office action; (2) Utility model and design patent applications;
(3) Re-examination cases involving invention, utility model and design patent applications (hereinafter referred to as re-examination cases); (4) Patent invalidation declaration cases involving invention, utility model and design patents (hereinafter referred to as invalidation declaration cases).

Priority examination conducted under bilateral or multilateral agreements concluded between the National Intellectual Property Administration and patent examination authorities of other countries or regions, or accelerated examination carried out after successful pre-examination by national-level intellectual property protection centers and rapid rights protection centers, shall be handled in accordance with relevant provisions and shall not be governed by these Measures.

Article 5 For patent applications and re-examination cases that feature important innovative value and promising prospects for transformation and application, the patent applicant or re-examination petitioner may file a request for priority examination if any of the following circumstances applies:
(1) They relate to emerging industries and future industries, or the research on key core technologies;
(2) They relate to industries prioritized and encouraged by provincial or prefecture-level people’s governments;
(3) The patent applicant or re-examination petitioner has implemented industrialization, or completed preparations for industrial implementation, or holds evidence proving that another party is exploiting its invention-creation;
(4) A Chinese patent application for which a request for substantive examination has been filed in other countries or regions after the first patent application on the same subject matter was submitted in China;
(5) Other circumstances that are of great significance to national interests or public interests.

Article 6 A petitioner for invalidation or a patentee may file a request for priority examination for an invalidation case under any of the following circumstances:
(1) An infringement dispute has arisen in respect of the patent involved, and the party concerned has requested a local intellectual property administration to handle the dispute or instituted litigation before a people's court;
(2) A dispute has arisen in respect of the patent involved, and the party concerned has requested the National Intellectual Property Administration to conduct an administrative ruling or mediation for a major patent infringement dispute, an administrative ruling under the early resolution mechanism for pharmaceutical patent disputes, or mediation for disputes arising from the implementation of open patent licensing;
(3) A dispute over a patent exploitation licensing contract has arisen in respect of the patent involved, and the party concerned has requested an arbitration institution to conduct arbitration;
(4) The patent involved is of great significance to national interests or public interests.

Local intellectual property administrations and people's courts as specified in Item (1) of the preceding paragraph, as well as arbitration institutions as specified in Item (3) of the preceding paragraph, may submit a request for priority examination for the invalidation case concerning the patent involved.

Article 7 Where a patent agency provides services for a patent applicant or a party to a case in requesting priority examination, it shall maintain good credit status and a high level of professional expertise and service, and conscientiously perform industry self-regulation obligations.

Article 8 Priority examination shall generally not be granted to a patent application or case under any of the following circumstances:
(1) The patent application is a divisional application for which priority examination has been approved for its parent application;
(2) For an invention patent application, the applicant filed a utility model patent application for the same invention-creation on the same date; (3) The patent application, re-examination case or invalidation case has already been subject to priority examination or other forms of accelerated examination within its respective examination procedure;
(4) For a patent application for which priority examination is requested pursuant to Item (4) of Article 5 of these Measures, evidence indicates that it obviously lacks prospects for patent grant.

                                                                                                                   Chapter 3 Submission of Requests

Article 9 Where there are two or more patent applicants, re-examination petitioners or patentees, the consent of all applicants, all re-examination petitioners or all patentees shall be obtained when submitting a request for priority examination pursuant to Article 5 or the first paragraph of Article 6 of these Measures.

Article 10 A patent application or case for which priority examination is requested shall be filed via electronic application means that meet the requirements.

Article 11 Where an applicant submits a request for priority examination for an invention, utility model or design patent application, the applicant shall submit a request for priority examination together with materials relevant to the applicable circumstances specified in Article 5 of these Measures. Except for the circumstance set forth in Item (4) of Article 5 of these Measures, the request for priority examination shall bear a recommendation signed by the relevant competent department of the State Council or a provincial intellectual property administration. The applicant may submit materials relating to prior art or prior design information that facilitate expediting the examination process.

Where a party submits a request for priority examination for a re-examination case or an invalidation case, it shall file a request for priority examination together with materials relevant to the applicable circumstances specified in Article 5 or Article 6 of these Measures. The request for priority examination shall bear a recommendation signed by the relevant competent department of the State Council or a provincial intellectual property administration.

Where a local intellectual property administration, people's court or arbitration institution submits a request for priority examination for an invalidation case, it shall file a request for priority examination and state the reasons therefor.

Article 12 Except for the fees payable as prescribed by the Patent Law and the Implementing Rules of the Patent Law, the National Intellectual Property Administration shall not charge additional fees for patent applications or cases for which priority examination is requested.


                                                                                                       Chapter 4 Examination and Review Procedures

Article 13 A provincial intellectual property administration shall recommend patent applications or cases for which priority examination is requested in accordance with the provisions of Articles 4 through 8 of these Measures, and state the reasons for recommendation. Where a petitioner for priority examination submits false materials or commits other acts in violation of the principle of good faith, no recommendation shall be made.

Article 14 After accepting a request for priority examination, the National Intellectual Property Administration shall examine the request for priority examination, the reasons for recommendation and relevant materials in accordance with these Measures. Where formal defects exist in the requested materials, the petitioner for priority examination shall be permitted to make amendments. Upon completion of the examination, a decision on whether to grant priority examination shall be made, and the examination opinion shall be notified to the petitioner for priority examination.

Article 15 For patent applications or cases for which the National Intellectual Property Administration approves priority examination, the handling shall be completed within the following time limits starting from the date of issuance of the Notification of Approval for Priority Examination, except for difficult and complicated circumstances:
(1) An initial action shall be taken for an invention patent application within forty-five days, and the case shall be closed within one year;
(2) Utility model and design patent applications shall be closed within two months;
(3) Re-examination cases shall be closed within seven months;
(4) Invalidation cases involving invention and utility model patents shall be closed within five months, and invalidation cases involving design patents shall be closed within four months.

Article 16 For patent applications under priority examination, the applicant shall make responses or corrections as soon as possible. The time limit for an applicant to respond to an office action for an invention patent application shall be one month starting from the date of issuance of the office action. The time limit for an applicant to respond to a correction notice or an office action for a utility model or design patent application shall be fifteen days starting from the date of issuance of such notice.

Article 17 For a patent application under priority examination, the National Intellectual Property Administration may terminate the priority examination procedure, handle the application in accordance with the ordinary procedure, and promptly notify the petitioner for priority examination if any of the following circumstances occurs:
(1) After the National Intellectual Property Administration issues the Notification of Approval for Priority Examination, the applicant amends the application documents pursuant to Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 57 of the Implementing Rules of the Patent Law;
(2) The applicant fails to respond within the time limit specified in Article 16 of these Measures or requests an extension of the response time limit;
(3) The applicant submits false materials or commits other acts in violation of the principle of good faith.

Article 18 For a re-examination case or invalidation case under priority examination, the National Intellectual Property Administration may terminate the priority examination procedure, handle the case in accordance with the ordinary procedure, and promptly notify the petitioner for priority examination under any of the following circumstances:
(1) The re-examination petitioner requests an extension for response;
(2) After the National Intellectual Property Administration issues the Notification of Approval for Priority Examination, the petitioner for invalidation supplements evidence and grounds, or the patentee amends the claims by means other than deletion;
(3) The re-examination or invalidation procedure is suspended;
(4) The trial of the case depends on the examination conclusion of another case;
(5) A party submits false materials or commits other acts in violation of the principle of good faith.

                                                                                                     Chapter 5 Supervision and Administration

Article 19 The National Intellectual Property Administration allocates and adjusts the quota of patent priority examination for each locality in light of factors including the administration of local patent priority examination work, the recommendation of priority examination requests and subsequent examination progress, the development of intellectual property protection and exploitation, and the support provided for national key industries and major strategies. It shall determine the overall quota of patent priority examination in a coordinated manner based on overall demand and examination capacity.

Article 20 A provincial intellectual property administration shall formulate working rules for priority examination recommendations, clarify the criteria for recommendation, ensure that recommendation work is fair, impartial, open and transparent, so as to strengthen administration and provide targeted services for petitioners requesting priority examination.

Article 21 Staff engaged in the recommendation, verification, examination and administration relating to priority examination shall strictly abide by relevant provisions of laws and regulations, and shall not commit acts such as dereliction of duty, abuse of power, irregularities for personal gain.

Article 22 Where a petitioner for priority examination or a patent agency has committed acts in violation of the principle of good faith, the National Intellectual Property Administration shall not accept any priority examination requests submitted by such party within one year from the date such acts are confirmed.

                                                                                                          Chapter 6 Supplementary Provisions

Article 23 These Measures shall be interpreted by the National Intellectual Property Administration.

Article 24 These Measures shall come into force on September 1, 2026. The Measures for Priority Examination of Patents promulgated by Order No. 76 of the National Intellectual Property Administration on June 27, 2017 shall be repealed simultaneously.

                                                                                                                                                                              Source: National Intellectual Property Administration