Examination opinions may be issued where the CNIPA believes the trademark application violating the Trademark Law, but if there is possibility of complying with the exceptional rules or other similar circumstances, the examiner will ask the applicant to make explanation or amendment to the trademark application within a statutory period to compliance with exceptional rules.
 
I. Legal Grounds to Issue the Opinion
 
Article 29 of Trademark Law, where, in the course of examination, the Trademark Office deems it necessary to require an explanation or amendment of a trademark registration application, it may require the applicant to provide an explanation or amendment. The applicant's failure to provide such an explanation or amendment shall not affect the decision of the Trademark Office upon examination.
 
Article 23 of the Implementing Regulation of the Trademark Law, in accordance with the provisions of Article 29 of the Trademark Law, the Trademark Office deems that the contents of the trademark registration application need specifying or correcting, the applicant shall make explanations or corrections within 15 days after receipt of the notice of the Trademark Office.
 
II. Scope of application
 
1. Where there is possibility of complying with the provisos of Item (2), (3) and (4) of Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2 of Article 10 of the Trademark Law, but a preliminary approval may be granted after making explanation.
 
2. In case of applying for trademark containing the State name or the name of an administrative division at or above the county level to be used on such special goods as newspapers, magazines, periodicals or newsletters, the applicant need to provide relevant evidence, for example, Periodical Publication License, etc.
 
3. Where there is possibility of complying with the provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article 11 of Trademark Law, but a preliminary approval may be granted after making explanation.
Where the trademark application is for a color combination trademark or a sound trademark and it is insufficient to determine such trademark has distinctive features based on the application documents, but a preliminary approval may be granted after the applicant supplements use evidence to state that such trademark has acquired features after long-term use.
Where the trademark application contains any non-distinctive part and shall therefore not be granted preliminary approval, but a preliminary approval may be granted after the applicant makes amendment.
 
4. Other circumstances on indeed necessary use.
Here are the cases for reference.
 
Example 1: China Training Periodical Office filed a trademark application “China training” in Chinese character. The application number is 17546396. Because it complied with the second scope of application, that is, the trademark contained the state name to be used on newspapers, magazines, periodicals and newsletters, the trademark office issued the Examination Opinion. In the response of the Examination Opinion, the applicant provided the evidentiary material from Human Resources and Social Security department, so the trademark office granted a preliminary approval. The registration number is 17546396.
 
Example 2: RUM CREATION & PRODUCTS, INC. applied a three-dimensional trademark “” with the word “ZACAPA” on it. The word “ZACAPA” is distinctive and was registered in China. The design lacks distinctiveness because it is the winebottle and the designated goods is wine product. It complied with (the third scope of application) the Paragraph 2 of Article 11 of Trademark Law, i.e., marks that merely indicate the quality, principal raw materials, function, use, weight, quantity or other features of the goods in respect of which the marks are used. So the trademark office issued the Examination Opinion to ask the applicant to disclaim the exclusive use of the design. The applicant disclaimed that in the response of the Examination Opinions. Now we can see this trademark application is registered with the registration number 20106009.
 
Example 3: NOKIA CORPORATION applied the sound trademark “” but met Examination Opinion because NOKIA didn’t provide the use evidence, proving the trademark got significant features through the long-term use on the designated goods. Referring to the third scope of application, where the trademark application is for a sound trademark and it is insufficient to determine such trademark has distinctive features based on the application documents, an Examination Opinion shall be issued. Then, in the response of the Examination Opinion, NOKIA provided the use evidence to prove the distinctiveness. Since it complied with the requirements, the trademark office granted a preliminary approval. The registration number is 14515370.
 
The following two cases is the examples for the fourth scope of application, i.e., other circumstances on indeed necessary use.
 
A. If the text contained in the application for trademark registration shall not be exclusive to any party, the applicant should provide the certificate of authorization document or disclaim the exclusive use. Otherwise, the trademark office shall issue an Examination Opinion. Please see example 4.
 
Example 4: Yibin Nanxi Huafeng Landscape Engineering Co. LTD didn’t provide the authorization documents from the “Changjiang Wetland Park” manager when applied the combination trademark “CHANGJIANG WETLAND PARK with design”. Because the part of “CHANGJIANG WETLAND PARK” isn’t be exclusive to the applicant, the trademark office issued an Examination Opinion. But the applicant neither provide the effective evidentiary material from the “Changjiang Wetland Park” manager nor disclaimed the exclusive use in the response, the trademark office refused this trademark application. The applicant finally filed a trademark review. We guessed the applicant provided the authorization documents or disclaim the exclusive use in this stage. The trademark got registration anyhow. The registration number is 19003805.
 
B. If the application for trademark registration includes the names of well-known persons, experts and scholars in the relevant industries, and actors and actresses known to the public, the applicant should attach the authorization documents from that person. Otherwise, the trademark office shall issue an Examination Opinion. Please see example 5.
 
Example 5: Beijing Dengfeng International Culture Communication Co. LTD applied “Wujing” trademark but met an Examination Opinion. As “Wujing” is a well-known actor in China, the applicant who applied this name as a trademark should provide the authorization documents from Wujing. In the response of the Examination Opinion, the applicant provided the same and the trademark office granted a preliminary approval finally. The registration number is 20038660.
 
We should note that the success of making explanation or amendment is not equal to the success of the trademark registration. The CNIPA will still examine the similarity of trademarks and make further decisions. If no refusal notification was issued, the CNIPA would grant a preliminary approval. The application would finally get registration if it is not challenged during the opposition period.
 
III. Statutory period
The applicant or the agent shall respond within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notification from the CNIPA.
 
IV. Result of making explanation or amendment
We may see that the Examination opinions is similar to the Rectification Notification. Both of them are issued when the CNIPA has opinions on the application documents or information. However, the result and remedy approach are different if the applicant fails to respond to them.
 
1) The result and remedy approach of responding to the Examination opinions
Failure to respond to the examination opinions, the CNIPA will refuse the trademark registration application. The applicant can only file a trademark review with 15 days if he disagreed with the refusal. If the response complies with the law, the CNIPA will examine the similarity of trademarks.
 
2) The result and remedy approach of responding to the Rectification Notification
Failure to responding to the Notification of Rectification, the CNIPA will dismiss the trademark application. The applicant can apply for administrative reconsideration. If the rectification complies with the law, the CNIPA will issue a filing receipt notice and then proceed with examining the similarity of trademarks.
 
V. The similarities and differences between Examination Opinions and Refusal Notification
1) Similarities
 
1. Both of them result from the application that does not meet registration requirements.
2. To get the final registration, the applicant should take action for it, otherwise the application will be deemed abandoned or dead.      
3. The statutory period to take action is 15 days from the date of receipt of the notification.
 
2)  Differences
The main difference is the remedy approach. Failure of responding to the Examination Opinions will result on trademark refusal, then the applicant shall file a trademark review. But the absence of filing a trademark review for trademark refusal shall result on an abandoned application, and the applicant can only file a new trademark application.
 
Reference:
Standards for trademark examination and trial
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/_Q6Jn9a0SvCccRuhEisQlQ 
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/S_6sL7MvDQQHLL4evjnnww