蒋道理｜商标异议·无效申请推理引擎（SJ-IRAC）

---

name: jiang-irac-opposition description: 商标异议·无效申请推理引擎（SJ-IRAC）：基于法条要件、证据链与风险分级的专业级审查与攻防系统。 homepage: https://github.com/jiangzhongling/jiang-irac-opposition metadata: clawdbot: emoji: "⚖️" tags: - trademark - opposition - invalidation - cnipa - sj-irac - evidence - legal-ai

---

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 < 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 < 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