In late 2025, the U.S. Second Circuit ruled that serving Chinese defendants by email alone is invalid — even in IP cases where speed matters. The Baby Shark counterfeiting decision made clear that where both countries are parties to the Hague Service Convention and the defendant's address is ascertainable, the Convention is mandatory. China's reservation to Article 10 excludes postal and email service. Efficiency and urgency are not exemptions.

For any cross-border IP litigation involving Chinese defendants, the compliance baseline is now unambiguous: service through official Hague channels is not optional — it is a precondition for obtaining jurisdiction over the defendant and enforcing the resulting judgment in China. 

The common concern: how long does Hague service to China actually take?

The conventional answer has been "four to eight months, sometimes longer." Our recent experience tells a different story.

In January 2026, a U.S. client retained our team to serve a complaint and summons on a Chinese defendant in a U.S. patent infringement case, via the Hague Convention's official channel. The front-end preparation was the most labor-intensive phase: confirming the applicable legal framework and service route, registering on the Ministry of Justice's online platform, coordinating multiple rounds of document review with the client, preparing and proofreading translations, and compiling the final application package. Once submitted, the request passed through system review, official fee payment, and court transmission. Service was completed — with full proof of delivery— in just 40 working days, a period that included the Chinese New Year holiday.

To be clear, this was a particularly efficient result. Our firm has handled multiple Hague service matters, and timelines vary significantly — from one to two months in faster cases, to six to ten months in others, depending largely on the processing pace of the local court where the defendant is located.

Why the system is getting faster

The efficiency gains are not accidental. China's judicial assistance infrastructure has undergone meaningful modernization in recent years. The Ministry of Justice has launched an online service platform, with the Supreme People's Court building a unified judicial assistance management system directly linked to it, enabling digital submission, review, and transmission of service requests — replacing the legacy paper-based chain. Provincial high courts in key jurisdictions such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangdong are now authorized to process incoming requests directly, reducing intermediate steps. And at the grassroots level, more local courts are treating Hague service as a priority matter, with dedicated personnel and faster response times.

Four takeaways for international practitioners

First, the overall efficiency of Hague service to China is improving. The old assumption of unpredictable, year-long timelines is being rewritten — though case-by-case variation remains.

Second, compliant service is now essential for enforceability. After the Second Circuit ruling, serving Chinese defendants outside the Hague framework risks not only procedural defects but also renders judgments practically unenforceable in China.

Third, early initiation is critical. Given timeline uncertainty, building Hague service into the litigation plan from the outset — rather than treating it as an afterthought — gives the overall case the best chance of staying on schedule.

Fourth, service and parallel proceedings in China often go hand in hand. Cross-border IP disputes frequently involve simultaneous actions in China. The pace of service directly affects the overseas litigation timeline, while developments in China can reshape strategy abroad. A team with end-to-end experience in Chinese IP litigation can coordinate both dimensions — helping clients achieve their commercial objectives through litigation.

For rights holders and litigation counsel managing cross-border IP disputes involving Chinese parties, the message is clear: compliant service is no longer a procedural formality. It is where enforceability begins.

For inquiries on Hague service to China or cross-border IP litigation support, please contact Chang Tsi Strategic Research Institute.