Subject: wu sin
Qualification number: 5141761
Practice file number: 1618841761. 8
Practice: beijing and japanese patent agency ltd
In may 2025, a natural person, xu, was sentenced to three years and six months in prison for violating the personal information of citizens by the people's court of zhou county, shanxi province. In the course of the case, it was established that xu had illegally purchased business and citizen's personal information and had used the information purchased to register the patent operations of the national intellectual property office for system accounts for profit. In further verification of the patent applications related to the enterprise in question, the national intellectual property agency (inip) has established that beijing and japan patent agents ltd. (hereinafter referred to as beijing ding and japan, which have withdrawn their license to practise) have acted as a substitute for filing a patent application for the use of false information about the subject. The person concerned, as the patent agent who filed a case for practice in beijing and japan, signed 36 related patent applications。
It has been established that the person concerned has worked in the enterprise since april 2024. In 2024, the parties submitted forged work experience material from the sichuan centre for cooperation in patent examination at the state intellectual property office's patent office, filed a patent agent's professional record, placed their patent agent's qualifications at beijing and japan, and charged a fee for “mounting”, but did not work full-time in beijing and japan, nor did they fulfil the required signature duty of the patent agent to write or review the patent application in his name. Of the patent applications processed on its behalf, 133 were initially recognized as irregular and were withdrawn。
On 16 december 2025, the state intellectual property agency served the person concerned with the notice of administrative penalties issued by the state intellectual property agency (the state secretariat's note (2025)). No. 61), dated 31 december 2025, sent another notice of administrative penalties to the national intellectual property agency (the state secretariat's note (2025) no. 92, informing the person concerned of the facts, reasons, grounds and content of the administrative penalty to be imposed and the list of serious breaches of trust to be included in the supervision of the market, as well as of the rights of the person concerned. On both occasions, the parties did not present their statements, their arguments or request a hearing within the legal time limit。
The facts described above are essentially supported by the following evidence:
1. Copies of the identity card of the person concerned and the patent agent's certificate
2. Proof of the person's practice in beijing and helgon
3. Internship material
4. List of relevant patent applications on behalf of the parties
5. List of patent applications on behalf of the parties that have been initially recognized as irregular and withdrawn
6. Proceedings of the beijing city intellectual property authority
7. Labour contract of the person concerned, social security documents
8. Proof of proceeds of a party's licence
In conclusion, the national intellectual property agency considers that, under the patent agents ordinance and the patent agents administration act, patent agents are required to practise at a patent agency for a period of one year and full-time at a patent agent; the patent agents are responsible for the patent agent's signed operations. Instead of working in a patent agency, the person concerned carries out the patent agent's practice by means of forged work experience material, placing the patent agent's qualifications on the patent agent and falsifying the fact that the patent agent's practice is exclusively performed by the patent agent. The failure of the parties to fulfil the required signature responsibilities of the patent agent led to the withdrawal of a large number of patent applications under their signature, which were initially recognized as irregular, as well as 36 patent applications that were based on the fraudulent use of information sold illegally by the perpetrator, which caused serious damage not only to the client's interests but also to the patent examination process, disturbing the working order of the patent, with serious consequences. The acts of the parties, in violation of article 26 (1) (e), article 28 (3) and articles 11 and 12 of the patent agents ordinance, are serious and are “not filed in accordance with these regulations” under article 26 (1) (a) of the patent agents ordinance。
In accordance with article 26, paragraph 1, of the patent agents ordinance, taking into account the facts, nature and circumstances of the offence committed by the person, the following penalties have been decided:
The license of the patent agent is revoked。
The above-mentioned actions of the parties fall within the meaning of article 9, paragraph 2, of the act on the control of serious mistrust lists for the supervision of markets “to engage in serious unlawful patent and trademark agency activity” and, in accordance with the relevant provisions of articles 2 and 12 of the act on the regulation of the control of serious mistrust lists for the control of markets, the decision was taken to include the person concerned in the list for the control of serious mistrust lists for the control of markets, to publicize them through the national credit information system and to implement the corresponding regulatory measures. The deadline for inclusion was 14 january 2026 to 13 january 2029. Upon expiry of one year, the person concerned may apply to the agency for the early removal of the list of serious breach and breach of trust under articles 16 and 17 of the act on the control of serious mistrust lists in the management of market supervision, to stop publicizing the relevant information and to lift the corresponding regulatory measures。
If the person concerned is not in agreement with this decision, he or she may, within 60 days from the date of receipt of the decision, apply to the national intellectual property authority for administrative review in accordance with the law, or within six months from the date of receipt of the decision, initiate administrative proceedings before a competent people's court. During the review and proceedings, the decision was not suspended。
National intellectual property agency
14 january 2026
