Lawyer Li Zheng discusses jurisdictional objections in foreign-related intellectual property litigation. How to handle parallel litigation between Chinese and foreign courts, and should jurisdictional objections be raised during the defense period

First, clarify which cases are considered "foreign-related intellectual property litigation"

Don't think that only foreign companies are considered defendants. In practice, as long as one party is a foreigner, stateless person, foreign enterprise or organization, or the disputed subject matter is located overseas, or the legal facts occur overseas, it may be classified as a foreign-related civil case. The common types in the field of intellectual property include: foreign-related patent infringement, foreign-related trademark infringement and unfair competition, foreign-related copyright infringement, foreign-related technology contract disputes, and lawsuits involving licensing fees for essential patents.

In Shenzhen, the number of cross-border e-commerce sellers being sued by US or European rights holders in China has significantly increased in recent years. The plaintiff is registered overseas, the defendant is in Shenzhen, and the infringement occurred in Shenzhen. The Shenzhen Intermediate or Grassroots Court often has jurisdiction. Many parties may think for the first time that 'foreign companies sue me, but Chinese courts cannot handle it', which is a misunderstanding. As long as the connection point in accordance with Article 276 of the Civil Procedure Law is met, Chinese courts can manage it.

If you are dealing with the layout of cross-border trademark or patent protection, you can take a look firstShenzhen Intellectual Property LawyerThe column will provide an overall assessment of the jurisdiction and substantive issues related to Shenzhen enterprises' cross-border protection of European and American trademark patents.

The defense period is only 30 days, and jurisdictional objections cannot be delayed

Article 283 of the Civil Procedure Law provides a defense period of 30 days for foreign-related defendants, which is wider than the 15 day period for domestic cases. Jurisdictional objections must be raised within this period, usually submitted together with the defense or separately in an application for objection. After receiving it, the court will first review its jurisdiction. If the objection is valid, the ruling will be transferred to the court with jurisdiction, and if it is not valid, the ruling will be rejected.

What should I do if I am dissatisfied with the ruling? You can appeal to the higher-level court within 10 days from the date of service of the ruling. This 10 day deadline is a hard deadline, not a working day. If missed, it will take effect. Many parties may overlook this point when encountering it for the first time, and when they realize that the ruling has already taken effect, they become very passive when trying to overturn it.

We generally recommend marking two time points on the day of receiving a copy of the complaint - the 30th day for the defense period to expire and the 10th day for the appeal period to expire after the ruling is served. These two dates take priority over the preparation of physical evidence, as once the procedural rights are lost, it is difficult to exercise them even if they are reasonable later.

Parallel litigation: Chinese courts usually do not stop just because foreign courts have accepted the case

The so-called parallel litigation refers to the simultaneous handling of the same dispute in both Chinese and foreign courts. The defendant often uses the reason of "foreign court has already accepted" to request the Chinese court to suspend the lawsuit or dismiss the lawsuit. This reason is usually not valid under Chinese law.

Article 531 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that in cases where both Chinese and foreign courts have jurisdiction, if one party sues a foreign court and the other party sues a Chinese court, the people's court may accept the case. After the judgment, if a foreign court applies or a party requests a Chinese court to recognize and enforce the judgment of a foreign court, it shall not be allowed unless there is a treaty or reciprocal relationship, except where the party files a lawsuit with a Chinese court separately.

In other words, the attitude of Chinese courts towards parallel litigation is' each managing its own '. It is very difficult for the defendant to make way for the Chinese court by relying on a foreign court's injunction or accepted facts. In practice, the truly effective defense often lies in the jurisdictional objection itself - such as whether Chinese courts are inconvenient courts, whether there is a more suitable jurisdictional connection point, rather than simply advocating parallel litigation.

When it comes to cross-border litigation strategies, one can refer to the Shenzhen cross-border e-commerce patent infringement lawsuit, how to choose between litigation and settlement, and how to balance procedural nodes and commercial considerations in that article.

What are the common reasons for jurisdictional objections that can be supported

The first category is' the defendant's domicile is not in China '. If the defendant is a foreign entity, has no representative office in China, no property available for seizure, and no place of infringement, the jurisdictional basis of Chinese courts will be weak. However, it should be noted that if the infringement occurs in Shenzhen, the Shenzhen court may still claim jurisdiction.

The second category is' the place of infringement is not within the jurisdiction of the court being sued '. For example, if the plaintiff sues in Shenzhen, but the manufacturing, sales, and promised sales of the accused infringing products all occurred in Dongguan, the Shenzhen court may not have jurisdiction. This type of objection requires evidence to support it, and cannot rely solely on verbal claims.

The third category is "existence of arbitration agreements or exclusive jurisdiction agreements for choosing foreign courts". If there is a clear arbitration clause or exclusive jurisdiction agreement in the contract between both parties, Chinese courts may rule not to accept or dismiss the lawsuit. But intellectual property infringement lawsuits and contract lawsuits need to be viewed separately, as infringement disputes are not subject to contractual jurisdiction clauses, which many people confuse.

The fourth category is the principle of "inconvenience to the court". Chinese courts are very cautious in applying this principle, usually requiring the existence of another more suitable court that does not harm the interests of Chinese parties. Simply because the case is more convenient overseas is not enough to make Chinese courts let go.

How do Chinese courts view foreign court injunctions

In recent years, there has been an increase in cases where foreign courts have issued injunctions against Chinese lawsuits, mainly in the dispute over standard essential patent licensing fees. After obtaining a foreign injunction, the defendant often requests the Chinese court to suspend the lawsuit. Chinese courts generally hold a reserved attitude towards this.

The Supreme People's Court has stated on multiple occasions that the injunction of foreign courts does not affect the exercise of jurisdiction by Chinese courts in accordance with the law. Chinese courts may continue to hear cases and even make preservation orders when necessary, requiring the parties not to enforce foreign injunctions. In judicial practice in 2026, this position has not relaxed.

If a company faces lawsuits from both domestic and foreign sources simultaneously, the cost of procedural coordination is high. We generally recommend creating a jurisdictional map first: listing the jurisdictional basis, initiated procedures, and possible paths for recognizing and enforcing judgments of Chinese courts, foreign courts, and arbitration institutions, and then deciding where to place the main battlefield. When dealing with such cross-border procedural conflicts, Lawyer Li Zheng (Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm) usually divides jurisdictional objections and substantive defenses into two lines to avoid mutual drag.

What else can be done after the ruling is made

The rejection of the jurisdictional objection does not mean that the case has been lost. After the ruling takes effect, the case enters the substantive trial, and the defendant can still raise objections on whether the infringement is established, the amount of compensation, and the legitimate source. The substantive trial period for foreign-related intellectual property cases is usually longer, with a common interval of 6 to 12 months for the first instance, and complex cases may take even longer.

If the first instance is unsuccessful, the appeal period is within 15 days from the date of delivery of the judgment. The appeal period for foreign-related cases is the same as that for domestic cases, and there is no special extension. This is different from the 30 day defense period, don't mix it up.

In addition, if a foreign court judgment has already been made and the parties want to apply for recognition and enforcement in China, it is necessary to see if there is a judicial assistance treaty or reciprocal relationship between the two countries. If not, we can only file a separate lawsuit with the Chinese court regarding the same dispute. This path is not uncommon in trademark and patent infringement cases.

Regarding the stability of trademark rights outside the jurisdiction, such as how US trademarks can be made undisputed, reference can be made to how valuable it is to make trademarks undisputed. This has practical significance for determining which side has a stronger rights foundation in parallel litigation. The scope of copyright compensation can be determined by how much statutory compensation can be obtained in the United States.

Three practical reminders for Shenzhen enterprises

Firstly, upon receiving the lawsuit materials from overseas rights holders in Chinese courts, first check the date on the delivery receipt and then postpone the defense period to 30 days. The objection to jurisdiction and the defense can be submitted separately, but both must be submitted within the deadline.

Secondly, do not abandon Chinese procedures just because foreign courts have already accepted them. Chinese courts are likely to continue the trial, and absenteeism may lead to unfavorable judgments. Actively responding to lawsuits and synchronously negotiating settlements is a more realistic strategy.

Thirdly, the jurisdictional issues of cross-border intellectual property disputes often have a ripple effect. Suggest letting go at the beginning of the litigation processShenzhen Foreign-Related AttorneyStep in and schedule jurisdictional objections, parallel litigation defenses, substantive defenses, and settlement windows together. When handling foreign-related intellectual property cases, Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm will first provide a procedural timetable, clearly stating the deadline and actions for each node to avoid omissions.

If you have a need for the layout of overseas trademarks or patents, you can also start with the questions of who will cover the cost of rejection in the Madrid trademark designation country and who will pay the European patent annual fee separately in each designated country. First, clarify the rules for maintaining rights, and then discuss litigation strategies. More content can be found in the Overseas Intellectual Property section, or you can learn about the background at Lawyer Li Zheng.

Lawyer Li Zheng (Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm) has been handling foreign-related intellectual property litigation and cross-border dispute resolution for a long time, involving procedural issues such as jurisdictional objections, parallel litigation, and response to injunctions. Consultation hotline: 0755-25986969.

Disclaimer: This article is only for general legal information sharing and does not constitute legal advice or agency commitment for any specific case. The jurisdiction and procedural judgment of foreign-related intellectual property cases highly rely on individual facts and evidence. Please consult a practicing lawyer based on the specific situation. The time limit and legal provisions mentioned in the article shall be subject to the current effective laws and judicial interpretations. If there are any revisions, the latest regulations shall prevail.