Guest Post: The Application of AI in China’s Patent Examination Process

CNIPA is using AI more and more. Implications and tips for practitioners who work with China

Allen Zhou is a partner and chief counsel at INRI IP Law, where he works closely with international clients to protect and enforce their intellectual property rights in China and with Chinese companies to find the right foreign associates for IP matters overseas with nearly a decade of cross-border IP experience. His practice spans a wide range of services, including patent and trademark applications, dispute resolution, e-commerce platform complaints (including Amazon), and international enforcement consulting such as ITC (337) matters.

Introduction

In recent years, China’s patent examination system has undergone a significant digital transformation, driven by the demand for faster and more efficient processes. One of the most notable changes is the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools across various stages of patent examination.

In this article, I’ll explore how AI is currently being used in China’s patent system, what the Chinese authorities have planned for the future, and what foreign attorneys—especially those representing overseas applicants—should know about these developments.

Current and Future Use of AI in China’s Patent System

As of 2024, AI is primarily used in the early stages of patent examination, including formalities review, prior art searches, and document classification. These tasks are structured and repetitive, making them a good fit for automation.

In the Sugon case, a leading high-performance computing and server manufacturer affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences developed an AI platform for the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). The system helps improve the efficiency of patent examination by automating the comparison and classification of technical documents.

However, at the substantive examination stage—where decisions about novelty and inventive step are made—AI still plays a supporting role. Human examiners remain the key decision-makers at this stage, although AI is expected to take on a larger role in the coming years.

Looking ahead, CNIPA has made it clear that AI will become more deeply embedded in patent examination. This intent is reflected in strategic documents and public statements. For instance, CNIPA has issued trial guidelines for AI-related invention patent applications. Additionally, officials like Mr. Changyu Shen have stressed the importance of strengthening intellectual property protection in AI-driven sectors.

These developments suggest that AI will eventually be involved in more complex aspects of examination, such as analyzing novelty and inventive step. While the AI systems are still evolving, CNIPA is committed to making sure this transition happens smoothly and with careful oversight.

Practical Implications for Attorneys

For patent attorneys in China, the rise of AI presents both benefits and challenges. On one hand, AI helps increase efficiency by automating routine tasks like prior art searches and document classification. On the other hand, it introduces new challenges, especially when Office Actions are based on AI-generated prior art comparisons.

A common trend now is the increasing number of Office Actions that cite numerous prior art documents. These citations are often selected by AI algorithms that may not fully capture the context or relevance of each reference. This can make it harder for attorneys to craft accurate responses. Additionally, Office Actions are now being issued faster and include more data, which requires skilled professionals to manage effectively.

A good practice is to cross-check each AI-cited reference manually to ensure it is technically relevant. Maintaining a balance between AI-assisted insights and human judgment is key to effective prosecution.

For foreign attorneys, understanding this shift is important. While AI-generated Office Actions are currently more common in domestic applications, it’s likely that foreign filings will see similar changes in the near future. Attorneys representing overseas applicants need to be prepared for this shift and adapt to the evolving system.

A Changing Role for Human Expertise

One of the most surprising implications of AI in patent examination is how it is changing the role of human expertise. AI is not merely accelerating the process—it is reshaping the way patent attorneys engage with their craft.

Patent attorneys must now go beyond traditional legal reasoning. They need to understand how AI systems select and interpret prior art, and they may need to challenge AI-generated conclusions. In a sense, they will need to learn how to “argue with the AI.”

In a recent case I handled, the AI system flagged a Chinese utility model as prior art for a software-related invention. The cited document included some overlapping keywords and technical terms, but on closer review, the actual solution in the prior art was completely different and lacked the key inventive concept in our claims. Initially, this confused the client, but we were able to clearly demonstrate to the examiner—through a side-by-side analysis—that the AI’s citation was not relevant. The human examiner agreed and removed the reference in the next Office Action.

This kind of situation shows that while AI can help surface documents more quickly, it doesn’t always grasp the true technical essence or context. As a result, attorneys who can combine technical knowledge with strategic thinking are becoming even more essential. In particular, they must be able to distinguish between valid AI-generated objections and those based on irrelevant or misleading data.

Conclusion

The integration of AI into China’s patent examination process is more than just a temporary experiment—it’s a fundamental shift in how patents are examined. While the efficiency gains are clear, both domestic and foreign attorneys need to be ready for an era where human expertise and machine learning intersect. The future of patent examination will require not only legal skills but also an understanding of how AI works and how to navigate its challenges. Those who can navigate both legal frameworks and intelligent technologies will define the next generation of patent professionals.

Weekly Novelties

• DeepSeek, the Chinese AI wunderkind, turns out to have filed for at least 19 patents (IAM Media)

• The Federal Circuit overturned an Apple PTAB win against Qualcomm, finding that the written materials evidentiary restriction was very strict and did not allow the PTAB to loop in the applicant’s own disclosures (IP Watchdog)

• The Federal Circuit held that merely applying machine learning to a new domain is not subject matter eligible; surprisingly, this was not an obviousness or enablement case (Holland & Knight)

• A jury awarded over $100 million in damages against Elon Musk’s X Corporation, formerly known as Twitter; this will likely make him even less of a fan of patents (Kera News)

• Nokia’s Q1 report showed significant changes in its licensing revenues (IAM Media)

• USPTO accelerated the issuance timeline for patents, aiming to reduce it from 3 weeks to 2 weeks (National Law Review)

• EPO President Antonio Campinos said that US instability induced by tariffs introduces an innovation opportunity for Europe (Euronews)

• An analysis finds that some numbers are more popular for trademarks than others, like 76 (Fast Company)

• China’s United Trademark Group, one of the world’s largest trademark licensors, invested in Xcel Brands to expand its global reach (Women’s Wear Daily)