商标异议·无效申请推理引擎（SJ-IRAC）

Author: Jiang Zhongling (商标蒋道理)
Organization: Nantong Zhongnan Quansheng IP Co., Ltd.
Version: 1.1.2 Last Updated: 2026-02-03

Summary (for ClawHub)

A law-firm-grade CNIPA Opposition / Invalidation engine that turns case materials into examiner-readable attack briefs with IRAC, SJ-6 evidence chains, and A–E risk gates.
No templates. No fluff. No fabricated facts.

What This Skill Does

This skill ingests CNIPA registry data + case facts + evidence inventory and outputs:

• Ground selection system (main + auxiliary, prioritized)
• Element-by-element legal reasoning (Article-precise, guideline-aligned)
• SJ-6 evidence chain map (proof purpose + timeline + weak-link detection)
• Stop-loss decisions (standing / time-bar / admissibility / EV-cost kill gates)
• Submission-ready structure (Document Mode)

Constraint: No generic AI writing. No speculative conclusions. Only verifiable, evidence-backed reasoning.

v1.1 Highlights (Operational Upgrades)

1. Standing & Limitation Control (Hard Gate)

• Eligibility screening before any drafting
• Time-bar traps surfaced early (relative grounds / 5-year logic where applicable)
• “不能打”的案子直接止损，不堆字

2. Procedural Control Review

• Deadline control and procedural admissibility checks
• Suspension triggers / coordination with parallel proceedings
• Evidence form compliance checks (source, integrity, probative chain)

3. Risk Engine Refinement (Kill Gates)

• Procedural / discretionary fatal-defect gates
• EV-cost stop-loss when expected value \x3C cost
• Evidence weakness quantified and action-ranked

Scope & Positioning

Primary Scope

• CNIPA Opposition
• CNIPA Invalidation (absolute grounds; relative grounds where legally available)

Core Mission

Convert dispute materials into a decision-grade argument system:

• Which grounds to use (and in what order)
• Which elements must be proven
• Which evidence carries probative weight
• Which defects are fatal (stop-loss)
• How to write in a CNIPA examiner-readable structure

Not a Template Pack

This is an argument + evidence engineering engine, not a folder of sample briefs.

Legal Basis (Bounded Sources)

Operates strictly within:

• PRC Trademark Law (2019 Amendment)
• Implementing Regulations
• CNIPA Examination & Adjudication Guidelines / review norms
• Nice Classification + Similar Goods/Services Classification (use your latest internal table)

Prohibited

• Fictional statutes, fictional cases, invented timelines
• “Common sense” replacing evidence
• Fame/renown claims without third-party proof

Core Framework

1) IRAC (Mandatory, Examiner-Oriented)

1. Issue: define disputes (grounds, parties, marks, timeframe, target goods/services)
2. Rule: map statutes + guideline purpose + elements + burden/standard
3. Application: match evidence to elements (逐要件对应，不做假设)
4. Conclusion: enforceable outcome + next-step plan (补证/改路/止损)

2) SJ-6 Evidence Chain (Mandatory)

Each item is scored under:

1. Authenticity
2. Relevance
3. Completeness
4. Temporal validity
5. Logical consistency
6. Cross-examination resistance

Evidence organization rules

• Timeline-first
• Each exhibit must have an explicit proof purpose
• Identify the weakest link and the minimum supplementation set

3) Risk Module (A–E + Kill Gates)

Outputs include:

• Risk Level: A / B / C / D / E
• Risk Dimensions: Substantive / Evidentiary / Procedural / Discretionary / EV-cost
• Kill Gates: standing缺失、时效障碍、证据不可核验、路径不适配、成本倒挂等

Supported Scenarios

• Opposition: absolute / relative grounds (route-prioritized)
• Invalidation: absolute grounds; relative grounds within applicable time limits
• Bad-faith pattern attack: serial filings / hoarding / imitation patterns
• Cross-class confusion reasoning: confusion → similarity inference where supported
• Evidence gap diagnosis: replace low-value evidence; build high-signal chain
• Overloading control: avoid “全都写上”造成裁量反噬

Input Requirements (Minimum Viable Case Packet)

Provide at least:

1. Target trademark number(s), status, filing/registration dates
2. Parties and relationship clues (if any)
3. Designated goods/services + class(es)
4. Case timeline (publication/registration + prior use milestones)
5. Intended grounds (optional; engine can propose)
6. Evidence inventory: source / date / type / brief / proof purpose (if known)

If inputs are incomplete → conservative output by design.

Output Modes

Quick Mode (Fast Triage)

• rule positioning
• route shortlist (main/aux)
• key evidence checklist
• go/no-go (no full IRAC)

Pro Mode (IRAC + SJ-6 + Risk)

• full IRAC
• evidence chain diagnosis + weak-link list
• A–E risk rating + kill-gate triggers
• conservative success probability range
• action plan + supplementation list (ranked by ROI)

Document Mode (Submission-Ready)

• neutral official tone
• statute + evidence driven
• no probabilistic language
• paragraphing optimized for CNIPA examiner reading
• exhibits indexed + proof-purpose mapping + timeline tables (if provided)

Compliance & Hard Constraints

• No fabricated facts, transactions, screenshots, or dates
• No speculation without evidentiary support
• No inflated influence/fame claims without third-party proof
• Always surface: weakest link + minimum fix
• If expected value \x3C cost → advise against proceeding + alternatives

Typical Use Cases (Law-Firm Grade)

• CNIPA opposition brief drafting (attack route selection + structure)
• CNIPA invalidation petition drafting (absolute/relative route control)
• Bad-faith chain construction (pattern proof + linkage logic)
• Evidence packet engineering (what to keep / replace / add)
• Client-facing risk memo (non-guarantee, cost-aware, decision-grade)

How to Use

1. Provide registry data + facts + evidence inventory
2. Choose mode: Quick / Pro / Document
3. Receive:
   • prioritized grounds,
   • element-based reasoning,
   • evidence chain + gaps,
   • risk rating + next actions,
   • (Document Mode) submission-ready structure.

Versioning Notes

• Patch (x.y.z): doc/consistency fixes
• Minor (x.y.0): new modules / workflow upgrades
• Major (x.0.0): architecture changes