*AI-generated translation, for reference only.

Keywords: Administrative; patent-related administrative case; invalidation procedure; subject matter eligible for patent protection; violation of social morality; harm to public interests; sacrificial articles

[Case Facts]

Gou [REDACTED] Li was the patentee of the utility model patent titled "Combined Folk Ritual Sacrificial Offering House," Patent No. 20162132****.3 (hereinafter referred to as the Patent). On January 8, 2021, Liu [REDACTED] Bin filed a request for invalidation against the Patent. On July 20, 2021, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) made Invalidation Request Examination Decision No. 51214 (hereinafter referred to as the contested decision), holding that the text and drawings in the description of the Patent only involved the description and improvement of the structure of the article, did not promote feudal superstition, and did not fall within the act of "promoting feudal superstition" as prescribed in the Patent Examination Guidelines. CNIPA further held that Claims 1 to 8 of the Patent possessed inventive step, and therefore maintained the validity of the Patent. Liu [REDACTED] Bin was dissatisfied and filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, requesting that the contested decision be revoked and that CNIPA be ordered to make a new decision.

On July 28, 2022, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court rendered Administrative Judgment No. (2021) Jing 73 Xing Chu 13874, dismissing the claims of Liu [REDACTED]. After Liu [REDACTED] filed an appeal, the Supreme People's Court, upon deliberation and decision by its adjudication committee, rendered Administrative Judgment No. (2023) SPC IP Administrative Final 2 on March 26, 2024, revoking the first instance judgment and the contested decision, and ordering CNIPA to make a new examination decision on the request for invalidation filed by Liu [REDACTED] against the Patent.

[Judge's Opinion]

The effective judgment of the Court held that the understanding and application of specific provisions of the Patent Law, including Article 5, Paragraph 1 thereof, shall be based on the legislative purpose prescribed in Article 1 of the Patent Law. The patent system is intended to protect inventions-creations that can promote scientific and technological progress and economic and social development. The legislative intent of the Patent Law is to encourage beneficial inventions-creations. So-called inventions-creations that bring no substantive benefit to scientific and technological progress or economic and social development should not receive patent protection.

The Patent relates to sacrificial articles and is closely connected with sacrificial culture. In China, sacrificial culture, as part of folk customs, is an important component of fine traditional Chinese culture. It has irreplaceable functions and value in remembering ancestors, promoting filial piety, strengthening identity, reassuring people, carrying forward the national lineage, inspiring people to forge ahead, and enhancing the cohesion and centripetal force of the Chinese nation. As a carrier for expressing and bearing such emotions, sacrificial articles have been preserved to this day for their own rational basis. Therefore, under ordinary circumstances, sacrificial articles do not necessarily constitute funeral articles involving feudal superstition.

However, even if a certain sacrificial article does not constitute a funeral article involving feudal superstition, it may still fall within the circumstances prescribed in Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law as violating social morality or harming public interests, and therefore should not be granted a patent right. The social morality prescribed in Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law refers to ethical and moral concepts and codes of conduct generally regarded by the public as proper and generally accepted by the public. Social morality has certain temporal and regional characteristics, and its connotation develops and changes over time and with social progress. As socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a new era, Core Socialist Values should serve as guidance in identifying, advocating, and promoting social morality that meets the requirements of the times and is commonly recognized by the people. The public interests prescribed in Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law refer to the common interests of the public, including public safety, environmental protection, public order, and the like.

According to Articles 1 and 2 of the Regulations on Funeral and Interment Control, sacrificial activities shall be conducted in accordance with laws and regulations, guided by Core Socialist Values, adapted to the development and changes of the times, and carried out under the principles of "green, low-carbon, environmentally friendly, and civilized" practices, so as to promote a new trend of green civilization and cultivate and maintain social public order and good customs. With the development of material civilization and spiritual civilization in China, people's living standards have greatly improved, and the culture of filial piety expressed through sacrificial practices has developed in a positive and diversified manner. More and more people are embracing the new ethos of the times and changing outdated customs and practices by conducting sacrificial activities in more civilized and frugal ways, such as offering flowers, tying ribbons, writing commemorative articles, and holding simple online memorial ceremonies. The new concept and trend of providing generous support to the living and simple funerals after death is quietly taking shape and becoming widely accepted. Some people still follow traditional customs and conduct sacrificial activities in a sincere, respectful, and simple manner, which should be respected. However, conduct that does not seek sincerity in sacrificial activities, but instead pursues novelty in form, focuses excessively on ritual formalities, involves high-priced consumption and extravagant arrangements, and includes the burning of imitation houses, villas, or even palaces, as well as elaborate paper cars, paper cattle, paper horses, and paper figures, not only departs from the essence of sacrificial activities in honoring the departed and remembering ancestors, but also easily fosters undesirable practices such as extravagance, waste, and blind comparison. Such conduct is contrary to good customs and is more likely to cause resource waste, environmental pollution, and even fire hazards and fire accidents. It should not be supported or encouraged.

The Patent is titled "Combined Folk Ritual Sacrificial Offering House" and is used for sacrificial activities. What it seeks to protect is an imitation house with a multi-layer framework structure. According to the description of the Patent, the patented product is for one-time use and is to be burned after use. In practice, products of this kind are often relatively expensive and likely to give rise to comparison among the public; they also waste resources, pollute the environment, and run counter to the modern funeral and interment concepts and new social trends of providing generous support to the living and simple funerals after death, and of changing outdated customs and practices. Granting patent protection to an invention-creation such as the sacrificial offering house involved in the Patent, which highlights luxury and extravagance in sacrificial activities, is inconsistent with the harmonious and civilized Core Socialist Values, inconsistent with the new development philosophy of green and low-carbon development, and detrimental to promoting the new ethos of the times and cultivating civilized social practices. At the same time, it is also inconsistent with the legislative purpose of the Patent Law to promote scientific and technological progress and economic and social development. Inventions-creations of this kind fall within the category of inventions-creations that violate social morality and harm public interests as prescribed in Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law, and should not be granted patent rights.

[Judgment Digest]

The patent system is intended to protect inventions-creations that can promote scientific and technological progress and economic and social development. So-called "inventions-creations" that bring no substantive benefit to scientific and technological progress or economic and social development should not receive patent protection. The understanding and application of specific provisions, including Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law, shall be based on the legislative purpose prescribed in Article 1 of the Patent Law.

In judicial practice, Core Socialist Values should serve as guidance in advocating and promoting social morality that meets the requirements of the times and is commonly recognized by the people. Even if a certain sacrificial article does not constitute a funeral article involving feudal superstition, it may still fall within the circumstances prescribed in Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law as violating social morality or harming public interests, and therefore should not be granted a patent right.

Granting patent protection to sacrificial articles such as sacrificial offering houses that are extravagant and wasteful and likely to trigger comparison is inconsistent with the harmonious and civilized Core Socialist Values, inconsistent with the new development philosophy of green and low-carbon development, and detrimental to promoting the new ethos of the times and cultivating civilized social practices. At the same time, it is also inconsistent with the legislative purpose of the Patent Law to promote scientific and technological progress and economic and social development. Inventions-creations of this kind fall within the category of inventions-creations that violate social morality and harm public interests as prescribed in Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law, and should not be granted patent rights.

[Related Index]

Articles 1 and Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China as amended in 2020. Articles 1 and Article 5, Paragraph 1 of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China, as effective on October 1, 2009, applied in this case.

First instance: Administrative Judgment No. (2021) Jing 73 Xing Chu 13874 rendered by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court on July 28, 2022.

Second instance: Administrative Judgment No. (2023) SPC IP Administrative Final 2 rendered by the Supreme People's Court on March 26, 2024.

The text of this case was adjusted on December 22, 2025.