SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 242236. November 5, 2018.]
ADVANCE BRANDS, INC., petitioner, vs.PHELPS DODGE PHILIPPINES ENERGY PRODUCTS CORPORATION AND DIRECTOR GENERAL JOSEPHINE R. SANTIAGO OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated05 November 2018which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 242236 (Advance Brands, Inc. v. Phelps Dodge Philippines Energy Products Corporation and Director General Josephine R. Santiago of the Intellectual Property Office)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the May 21, 2018 Decision 2 and the August 16, 2018 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 154450 for failure of petitioner Advance Brands, Inc. (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in ruling that no grave abuse of discretion can be attributed to public respondent Director General Josephine R. Santiago (respondent) of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) for denying petitioner's appeal outright.
As correctly ruled by the CA, the June 3, 2016 Order 4 of the IPO-Bureau of Legal Affairs denying petitioner's Urgent Motion to Lift the Order of Default 5 was an interlocutory order, and hence, not appealable. 6 Therefore, respondent acted correctly when she denied petitioner's appeal outright as provided for in Sections 1 7 and 5 (b) (2) 8 of the IPO Uniform Rules on Appeal. 9
SO ORDERED." (REYES, J., JR., J., designated Additional Member per Special Order No. 2587 dated August 28, 2018; on official leave.) IDTSEH
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 13-28.
2.Id. at 35-42. Penned by Associate Justice Magdangal M. De Leon with Associate Justices Rodil V. Zalameda and Renato C. Francisco, concurring.
3.Id. at 44-45.
4.Id. at 95-96. Issued by Hearing Officer Atty. Z'sa May B. Subejano-Pe Lim.
5. Dated October 28, 2014. Id. at 88-90.
6. See id. at 40.
7. Section 1. Title and Coverage. — x x x. Interlocutory orders, however, shall not be appealable to the Director General.
8. Section 5. Action on the Appeal Memorandum. — x x x.
b) The appeal shall be dismissed outright on any of the following grounds:
xxx xxx xxx
2. the subject of the appeal is an interlocutory order, or is not a decision or final order[.]
9. IPO Office Order No. 12-09, Series of 2009, entitled "AMENDMENTS TO THE IPO UNIFORM RULES ON APPEAL," approved on February 4, 2009.