Ａ：

China’s patent system provides three types of patent rights: invention, utility model, and design. The patent for invention is similar to the utility patent in US. The utility model in China intertwines with as well as differs from the patent for invention.  

Methods and materials not allowed for utility model

Utility model means any new technical solution relating to the shape, the structure, or their combination of a product, which is fit for practical use. A utility model can not claim a method or the composition of a material, which are legitimate subject matters for the patent for invention.

10 years of protection term

A utility model patent is valid for 10 years from the priority date, in contrast with the 20-year term of an invention patent.

Preliminary examination and Novelty examination required

In the Chinese Patent system, examination of an application involves two stages, preliminary examination and substantive examination. The preliminary examination is required for a utility model. The preliminary examination is not merely formality examination, it also includes examining whether an application has “obvious substantive defects,” such as whether the application obviously falls out of the subject matter prescribed in article 5 or 25 of the Chinese Patent Law, and whether the application obviously contains more than one invention. Novelty examination is also required for a utility model if deemed necessary by an examiner.

6 to 12 months of prosecution time     

Because no substantive examination is involved, the overall prosecution time for a utility model is short, usually 6 to 12 months from the filing date.

Lower patentability standard

Although substantive examination is not conducted during examination of a utility model, a patentability standard is applied in the “obvious substantive defects” examination as mentioned before, as well as in the proceedings of invalidation and “patent right evaluation report” as will be explained later.

A utility model must have novelty, inventiveness, and industrial applicability. The inventiveness required for a utility model is lower than that of a patent for invention. A utility model is only required to have substantive features and represent progress; in contrast, a patent for invention is required to have “prominent substantive features and represent a notable progress.”

In practice, when evaluating the inventiveness of a utility model, CNIPA is restrained to employ usually one or two pieces of prior art belonging to the same technical field as the utility model. In contrast, when examining an invention application, CNIPA is allowed use unlimited prior art belonging to the same or related technical fields as the invention.

Frequent invalidation attacks

In China, any entity or individual can attack the validity of the utility model at the Patent Reexamination and Invalidation Department. Since a utility model only requires preliminary examination, it has to face more invalidation attacks than a patent for invention.

“Patent right evaluation report” required to enforce a utility model

Since a utility models only requires preliminary examination, to enforce a utility model, a patentee must resort to CNIPA for a “patent right evaluation report,” which includes the search result and comments on the patentability.

No switching between invention and utilit model; patent for invention can claim priority from a utility model and vice versa

Upon filing an application, either the utility model or invention patent must be chosen. It is not possible to change from one type to the other later, or branch out a utility model application from an invention application.

However, for priority purpose, a patent for invention can claim priority from a utility model and vice versa.

Double patenting between a utility model and an invention not allowed; an applicant can obtain a utility model first, and later abandon the utility model to obtain a patent for invention claiming the same subject matter. 

Where the claim scope of a utility model and a patent for invention is identical, they are regarded as double patenting and are not allowed to co-exist.

If a same applicant files a utility model application and an invention application for the same subject matter on the same day, the utility model is usually granted first, in case that the invention application is ready to be allowed and the utility model is still valid at that time, the applicant is allowed to abandon the utility model and choose the invention patent.