1. The Object of a Request for Invalidation  The object of a request for Invalidation shall be the granted patent. It can even be an expired patent or a renounced patent, but not a patent renounced from the date of application. A request for invalidation shall not be allowable if it is not directed to a patent the grant of which has been announced.  Where, after the Patent Reexamination Board has made an examination decision of partial or whole invalidation of the patent right, the party concerned fails to institute legal proceedings before the People’ s Court within three months from the receipt of the examination decision, or the examination decision is upheld by an effective judgment of the People’s Court, a request for invalidation directed to the patent right which has been invalidated by the examination decision shall not be accepted..
2. Eligibility as a Petitioner for Invalidation
Where the petitioner falls into one of the following cases, his request for invalidation shall not be accepted:
(1) the petitioner is not eligible to institute a civil action;
(2) where a request for invalidating a design patent is submitted on the ground that the design patent is in conflict with a legitimate right of another individual which was acquired prior to the filing date of the patent, the petitioner fails to prove himself the prior right holder or the interested party.  Wherein, the interested party refers to the person who is entitled to file a lawsuit before the People’s Court or request the competent administrative authority to handle the matter regarding the dispute over infringement of the prior right in accordance with the relevant legal provisions;
(3) where the patentee files a request for invalidation of his own patent right and requests to invalidate the whole of the patent, the evidence submitted is not a publication, or not all the patentees of the patent have joined in filing the request for invalidation; and
(4) several petitioners jointly submit a request for invalidation, unless all the patentees request to invalidate their common patent right.
3. Scope, Causes and Evidence of a Request for Invalidation
(1) The scope to be requested for invalidation shall be clearly indicated in a request for invalidation. If not clearly indicated, the Patent Reexamination Board shall inform the petitioner to make a rectification within a specified time limit. If no rectification is made within the time limit, the request for invalidation shall be deemed not to have been made.  (2) The causes for invalidation shall be limited to those prescribed in Rule 65. 2 only, and the relevant specific provisions of the Patent Law and its Implementing Regulations shall be indicated as independent causes. A request for invalidation shall not be accepted if the causes for invalidation do not belong to any of those prescribed in Rule 65.2.   (3) A request for invalidating a patent shall not be accepted if the causes and evidence are the same as those of a previous request for invalidating the same patent that has been decided by the Patent Reex aminatio Board, unless the causes or evidence have not been taken in t account in the previous decision due to the reason of time limit, etc.  (4) For a request for invalidating a patent for design based on the cause that the patent for design is in conflict with a legitimate right of another individual, which was acquired prior to the filing date of the patent, it shall not be accepted if no evidence is submitted to prove such conflict of rights.
(5) The petitioner shall explain the causes for invalidation con cretely making reference to all the evidence if applicable. For an in ventio or utility model patent, if a comparison of technical solutions is required, a specific description shall be given to the relevant technical solutions in the patent concerned and the reference documents, comparative analysis shall be made in that regard. For a design patent, if a comparison is required, a specific description shall be given to the product designs as shown in the drawings or photographs of the patent concerned and the reference documents, comparative analysis shall be made in that regard. For example, where the request for invalidation is based on Article 22. 3 and more than one reference document is sub mitted the petitioner shall indicate which one is the closest to the pa ten to be requested for invalidation, state whether the reference document are used separately or in combination, give a specific description to the technical solutions in the patent concerned and the reference documents, and make comparative analysis. If they are used in combination and there exist two or more possibilities of combination, the specific manner of combination shall be indicated. For different independent claims, the respective closest reference document may be indicated separately.
Where the petitioner fails to explain concretely the causes for in validation, or fails to explain with reference to all the evidence or fails to indicate the corresponding evidence for each cause if there is evidence, the request for invalidation shall not be accepted.