Toda i Monda , No ember 02, 2020 mi ake, and /or decei ed he general con ming p blic, i ho he con en , permi

he con en , permi or a hori of he regi ered

o ner, LEVI S, h depri ing and defra ding he la er of i righ o he e cl i e e of i rademark and
9th legi ima e rade, o he damage and prej dice of LEVI S.

CONTRARY TO LAW.5

The ca e ere con olida ed for a join rial. Dia en ered hi plea of g i o each informa ion on J ne 21,
2000.6
Rep blic of he Philippine
SUPREME COURT 1.
Manila
E P
FIRST DIVISION
Le i S ra and Compan (Le i ), a foreign corpora ion ba ed in he S a e of Dela are, Uni ed S a e of America,
G.R. N . 180677 F 18, 2013 had been engaged in he apparel b ine . I i he o ner of rademark and de ign of Le i jean like LEVI S
501, he arc a e de ign, he o-hor e brand, he o-hor e pa ch, he o-hor e pa ch i h pa ern arc a e, and
VICTORIO P. DIA , Pe i ioner, he compo i e ab arc a e. LEVI S 501 ha he follo ing regi ered rademark , o i : (1) he lea her pa ch ho ing
. o hor e p lling a pair of pan ; (2) he arc a e pa ern i h he in crip ion "LEVI STRAUSS & CO;" (3) he
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND LEVI STRAUSS PHILS. , INC., Re ponden . arc a e de ign ha refer o " he o parallel i ching c r ing do n ard ha are being e n on bo h back pocke
of a Le i Jean ;" and (4) he ab or piece of clo h loca ed on he r c ral eam of he righ back pocke , pper lef
DECISION ide. All he e rademark ere regi ered in he Philippine Pa en Office in he 1970 , 1980 and earl par of
1990 .7
BERSAMIN, .:
Le i S ra Philippine , Inc. (Le i Philippine ) i a licen ee of Le i . Af er recei ing informa ion ha Dia a
I i he endenc of he allegedl infringing mark o be conf ed i h he regi ered rademark ha i he gra amen
elling co n erfei LEVI S 501 jean in hi ailoring hop in Alman a and Talon, La Pi a Ci , Le i Philippine
of he offen e of infringemen of a regi ered rademark. The acq i al of he acc ed ho ld follo if he allegedl
hired a pri a e in e iga ion gro p o erif he informa ion. S r eillance and he p rcha e of jean from he ailoring
infringing mark i no likel o ca e conf ion. Thereb , he e idence of he S a e doe no a i f he q an m of
hop of Dia e abli hed ha he jean bo gh from he ailoring hop of Dia ere co n erfei or imi a ion of
proof be ond rea onable do b .
LEVI S 501. Le i Philippine hen o gh he a i ance of he Na ional B rea of In e iga ion (NBI) for p rpo e
of appl ing for a earch arran again Dia o be er ed a hi ailoring hop . The earch arran ere i ed in
Acc ed Vic orio P. Dia (Dia ) appeal he re ol ion prom lga ed on J l 17, 20071 and No ember 22, 2007,2 d e co r e. Armed i h he earch arran , NBI agen earched he ailoring hop of Dia and ei ed e eral
hereb he Co r of Appeal (CA), re pec i el , di mi ed hi appeal in C.A.-G.R. CR No. 30133 for he bela ed fake LEVI S 501 jean from hem. Le i Philippine claimed ha i did no a hori e he making and elling of he
filing of he appellan ' brief, and denied hi mo ion for recon idera ion. Thereb , he deci ion rendered on Febr ar ei ed jean ; ha each of he jean ere mere imi a ion of gen ine LEVI S 501 jean b each of hem bearing he
13, 2006 in Criminal Ca e No. 00-0318 and Criminal Ca e No. 00-0319 b he Regional Trial Co r , Branch 255, in regi ered rademark , like he arc a e de ign, he ab, and he lea her pa ch; and ha he ei ed jean co ld be
La Pifia Ci (RTC) con ic ing him for o co n of infringemen of rademark ere affirmed.3 mi aken for original LEVI S 501 jean d e o he placemen of he arc a e, ab, and o-hor e lea her pa ch.
A 2.
On Febr ar 10, 2000, he Depar men of J ice filed o informa ion in he RTC of La Pi a Ci , charging Dia E D
i h iola ion of Sec ion 155, in rela ion o Sec ion 170, of Rep blic Ac No. 8293, al o kno n a he I e ec a
P e C de f he Phi i i e (I e ec a P e C de), o i : On hi par , Dia admi ed being he o ner of he hop earched, b he denied an criminal liabili .
Criminal Ca e No. 00-0318 Dia a ed ha he did no man fac re Le i jean , and ha he ed he label "LS Jean Tailoring" in he jean
ha he made and old; ha he label "LS Jean Tailoring" a regi ered i h he In ellec al Proper Office; ha
Tha on or abo A g 28, 1998, and on da e prior here o, in La Pina Ci , and i hin he j ri dic ion of hi hi hop recei ed clo he for e ing or repair; ha hi hop offered made- o-order jean , ho e le or de ign
Honorable Co r , he abo enamed acc ed, i h criminal in en o defra d Le i S ra (Phil.) Inc. (hereinaf er ere done in accordance i h in r c ion of he c omer ; ha ince he ime hi hop began opera ing in 1992,
referred o a LEVI S), did hen and here, illf ll , nla f ll , felonio l , kno ingl and in en ionall engaged in he had recei ed no no ice or arning regarding hi opera ion ; ha he jean he prod ced ere ea il recogni able
commerce b reprod cing, co n erfei ing, cop ing and colorabl imi a ing Le i regi ered rademark or dominan beca e he label "LS Jean Tailoring," and he name of he c omer ere placed in ide he pocke , and each
fea re hereof ch a he ARCUATE DESIGN, TWO HORSE BRAND, TWO HORSE PATCH, TWO HORSE of he jean had an "LSJT" red ab; ha "LS" ood for "La e S le;" and ha he lea her pa ch on hi jean had o
LABEL WITH PATTERNED ARCUATE DESIGN, TAB AND COMPOSITE ARCUATE/TAB/TWO HORSE PATCH,
and in connec ion here o, old, offered for ale, man fac red, di rib ed co n erfei pa che and jean , incl ding b ffaloe , no o hor e .
o her prepara or ep nece ar o carr o he ale of aid pa che and jean , hich likel ca ed conf ion,
R RTC
mi ake, and /or decei ed he general con ming p blic, i ho he con en , permi or a hori of he regi ered
o ner, LEVI S, h depri ing and defra ding he la er of i righ o he e cl i e e of i rademark and On Febr ar 13, 2006, he RTC rendered i deci ion finding Dia g il a charged, di po ing h :
legi ima e rade, o he damage and prej dice of LEVI S.
WHEREFORE, premi e con idered, he Co r find acc ed Vic orio P. Dia , a.k.a. Vic Dia , GUILTY be ond
CONTRARY TO LAW.4 rea onable do b of ice iola ing Sec. 155, in rela ion o Sec. 170, of RA No. 8293, a alleged in he Informa ion
in Criminal Ca e No . 00-0318 & 00-0319, re pec i el , and hereb en ence him o ffer in each of he ca e he
Criminal Ca e No. 00-0319 penal of impri onmen of TWO (2) YEARS of i i c eci a , a minim m, p o FIVE (5) YEARS of i i
c eci a , a ma im m, a ell a pa a fine of 50,000.00 for each of he herein ca e , i h b idiar
Tha on or abo A g 28, 1998, and on da e prior here o, in La Pina Ci , and i hin he j ri dic ion of hi impri onmen in ca e of in ol enc , and o ffer he acce or penal ie pro ided for b la .
Honorable Co r , he abo enamed acc ed, i h criminal in en o defra d Le i S ra (Phil.) Inc. (hereinaf er
referred o a LEVI S), did hen and here, illf ll , nla f ll , felonio l , kno ingl and in en ionall engaged in Al o, acc ed Dia i hereb ordered o pa o he pri a e complainan Le i S ra (Phil .), Inc. he follo ing,
commerce b reprod cing, co n erfei ing, cop ing and colorabl imi a ing Le i regi ered rademark or dominan h :
fea re hereof ch a he ARCUATE DESIGN, TWO HORSE BRAND, TWO HORSE PATCH, TWO HORSE
LABEL WITH PATTERNED ARCUATE DESIGN, TAB AND COMPOSITE ARCUATE/TAB/TWO HORSE PATCH, 1. 50,000.00 in e emplar damage ; and
and in connec ion here o, old, offered for ale, man fac red, di rib ed co n erfei pa che and jean , incl ding
o her prepara or ep nece ar o carr o he ale of aid pa che and jean , hich likel ca ed conf ion, 2. 222,000.00 a and b a of a orne fee .
Co de officio. a hi per onal for ne a ake, e pec edl b innocen l p hi f lle r in hi co n el abili ie and
profe ionali m in he handling of hi appeal. He hereb deli ered hi fa e o he hand of hi co n el. Whe her or
SO ORDERED.10 no ho e hand ere efficien or rained eno gh for he job of handling he appeal a a learning ha he o ld ge
onl in he end. Likelier han no , he a probabl e en na are of he hree ime ha hi co n el had req e ed
R CA he CA for e en ion . If he ere no o be lef o hi n an ed fa e, he o ld rel ffer de pi e hi innocence.
Ho co l a learning i o ld be for him! Tha i here he Co r come in. I i mo impor an for a di pen er
Dia appealed, b he CA di mi ed he appeal on J l 17, 2007 on he gro nd ha Dia had no filed hi of j ice no o allo he inad er ence or incompe ence of an co n el o re l in he o righ depri a ion of an
appellan brief on ime de pi e being gran ed hi req e ed e eral e en ion period . appellan righ o life, liber or proper . 13

Upon denial of hi mo ion for recon idera ion, Dia i no before he Co r o plead for hi acq i al. We do no mind if hi of ening of j dicial a i de be mi labeled a e ce i e lenienc . Wi h o m ch on he line,
he people ho e f re hang in a balance ho ld no be lef o ffer from he incompe ence, mindle ne or lack
I
of profe ionali m of an member of he La Profe ion. The rea onabl e pec a j re l in e er li iga ion.
Dia bmi ha : The co r m gi e hem ha j re l . Tha a rance i he people bir hrigh . Th , e ha e o ndo Dia
dire fa e.
THE COURT OF APPEALS VIOLATED EXISTING LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE WHEN IT APPLIED RIGIDLY
THE RULE ON TECHNICALITIES AND OVERRIDE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF E en a e no e a ide he CA rejec ion of he appeal of Dia , e ill no remand he record o he CA for i
re ie . In an appeal of criminal con ic ion , he record are laid open for re ie . To a oid f r her dela , herefore,
THE PETITIONER FOR LATE FILING OF APPELLANT S BRIEF.11
e ake i pon o r el e o re ie he record and re ol e he i e of g il , con idering ha he record are
R alread before .

The Co r fir re ol e he her he CA properl di mi ed he appeal of Dia d e o he la e filing of hi appellan Sec ion 155 of R.A. No. 8293 define he ac ha con i e infringemen of rademark, i :
brief.
Re edie ; I f i ge e . An per on ho hall, i ho he con en of he o ner of he regi ered mark:
Under Sec ion 7, R le 44 of he R e f C , he appellan i req ired o file he appellan brief in he CA " i hin
155.1. U e in commerce an reprod c ion, co n erfei , cop , or colorable imi a ion of a regi ered mark or he ame
for -fi e (45) da from receip of he no ice of he clerk ha all he e idence, oral and doc men ar , are a ached o
con ainer or a dominan fea re hereof in connec ion i h he ale, offering for ale, di rib ion, ad er i ing of an
he record, e en (7) copie of hi legibl pe ri en, mimeographed or prin ed brief, i h proof of er ice of o (2)
good or er ice incl ding o her prepara or ep nece ar o carr o he ale of an good or er ice on or in
copie hereof pon he appellee." Sec ion 1(e) of R le 50 of he R e f C gran o he CA he di cre ion o
connec ion i h hich ch e i likel o ca e conf ion, or o ca e mi ake, or o decei e; or
di mi an appeal ei her i or on mo ion of he appellee ho ld he appellan fail o er e and file he
req ired n mber of copie of he appellan brief i hin he ime pro ided b he R e f C .12 155.2. Reprod ce, co n erfei , cop or colorabl imi a e a regi ered mark or a dominan fea re hereof and appl
ch reprod c ion, co n erfei , cop or colorable imi a ion o label , ign , prin , package , rapper , recep acle
The age of he ord a in Sec ion 1(e) of R le 50 indica e ha he di mi al of he appeal pon fail re o file or ad er i emen in ended o be ed in commerce pon or in connec ion i h he ale, offering for ale,
he appellan brief i no manda or , b di cre ionar . Veril , he fail re o er e and file he req ired n mber of di rib ion, or ad er i ing of good or er ice on or in connec ion i h hich ch e i likel o ca e conf ion,
copie of he appellan brief i hin he ime pro ided b he R e f C doe no ha e he immedia e effec of or o ca e mi ake, or o decei e, hall be liable in a ci il ac ion for infringemen b he regi ran for he remedie
ca ing he o righ di mi al of he appeal. Thi mean ha he di cre ion o di mi he appeal on ha ba i i hereinaf er e for h: Pro ided, Tha he infringemen ake place a he momen an of he ac a ed in S b ec ion
lodged in he CA, b ir e of hich he CA ma ill allo he appeal o proceed de pi e he la e filing of he 155.1 or hi b ec ion are commi ed regardle of he her here i ac al ale of good or er ice ing he
appellan brief, hen he circ m ance o arran i liberali . In deciding o di mi he appeal, hen, he CA i infringing ma erial.
bo nd o e erci e i o nd di cre ion pon aking all he per inen circ m ance in o d e con idera ion.
The elemen of he offen e of rademark infringemen nder he I e ec a P e C de are, herefore, he
The record re eal ha Dia co n el hrice o gh an e en ion of he period o file he appellan brief. The fir follo ing:
ime a on March 12, 2007, he req e being for an e en ion of 30 da o commence on March 11, 2007. The
CA gran ed hi mo ion nder i re ol ion of March 21, 2007. On April 10, 2007, he la da of he 30-da 1. The rademark being infringed i regi ered in he In ellec al Proper Office;
e en ion, he co n el filed ano her mo ion, eeking an addi ional 15 da . The CA allo ed he co n el n il April
25, 2007 o er e and file he appellan brief. On April 25, 2007, he co n el en a hird ime o he CA i h 2. The rademark i reprod ced, co n erfei ed, copied, or colorabl imi a ed b he infringer;
ano her req e for 15 da . The CA ill gran ed ch hird mo ion for e en ion, gi ing he co n el n il Ma 10,
2007. No i h anding he liberali of he CA, he co n el did no li erall compl , filing he appellan brief onl on 3. The infringing mark i ed in connec ion i h he ale, offering for ale, or ad er i ing of an good ,
Ma 28, 2007, hich a he 18 h da be ond he hird e en ion period gran ed. b ine or er ice ; or he infringing mark i applied o label , ign , prin , package , rapper ,
recep acle or ad er i emen in ended o be ed pon or in connec ion i h ch good , b ine or
Under he circ m ance , he fail re o file he appellan brief on ime righ l de er ed he o righ rejec ion of he er ice ;
appeal. The ac of hi co n el bo nd Dia like an o her clien . I a , of co r e, onl he co n el ho a ell
a are ha he R e f C fi ed he period o file pleading and eq all ignifican paper like he appellan 4. The e or applica ion of he infringing mark i likel o ca e conf ion or mi ake or o decei e
brief i h he lof objec i e of a oiding dela in he admini ra ion of j ice. p rcha er or o her a o he good or er ice hem el e or a o he o rce or origin of ch good or
er ice or he iden i of ch b ine ; and
Ye , e ha e before an appeal in o criminal ca e in hich he appellan lo hi chance o be heard b he CA
on appeal beca e of he fail re of hi co n el o er e and file he appellan brief on ime de pi e he gran of 5. The e or applica ion of he infringing mark i i ho he con en of he rademark o ner or he a ignee
e eral e en ion he co n el req e ed. Dia a con ic ed and en enced o ffer o inde ermina e en ence hereof.14
ha o ld req ire him o pend ime in de en ion for each con ic ion la ing o ear , a minim m, o fi e ear , a
ma im m, and o pa fine o aling 100,000.00 ( i h b idiar impri onmen in ca e of hi in ol enc ). Hi A can be een, he likelihood of conf ion i he gra amen of he offen e of rademark infringemen .15 There are
per onal liber i no no le a ake. Thi reali impel o look be ond he echnicali and del e in o he o e o de ermine likelihood of conf ion, namel : he dominanc e , and he holi ic e . The con ra ing
meri of he ca e o ee for o r el e if he appeal, had i no been di mi ed, o ld ha e been or h he ime of concep of he e e a e plained in S cie e De P d i Ne e, S.A. . D , J ., h :
he CA o pa pon. Af er all, hi appellan brief had been mean hile bmi ed o he CA. While del ing in o he
meri of he ca e, e ha e nco ered a eakne in he e idence of g il ha canno be impl ignored and . The dominanc e foc e on he imilari of he main, pre alen or e en ial fea re of he compe ing
glo ed o er if e ere o be r e o o r oa h o do j ice o e er one. rademark ha migh ca e conf ion. Infringemen ake place hen he compe ing rademark con ain he
e en ial fea re of ano her. Imi a ion or an effor o imi a e i nnece ar . The q e ion i he her he e of he
We feel ha de pi e he CA being probabl righ in di mi ing he e c e of o er igh and e c able negligence mark i likel o ca e conf ion or decei e p rcha er .
endered b Dia co n el o j if he bela ed filing of he appellan brief a n or h of erio con idera ion,
Dia ho ld no be made o ffer he dire con eq ence. An acc ed in hi hoe , i h hi per onal liber a ell
The holi ic e con ider he en ire of he mark , incl ding label and packaging, in de ermining conf ing There ere o her remarkable difference be een he o rademark ha he con ming p blic o ld ea il
imilari . The foc i no onl on he predominan ord b al o on he o her fea re appearing on he label .16 percei e. Dia ap l no ed ch difference , a follo :

A o ha e ho ld be applied in a rademark infringemen ca e, e aid in McD ad C ai . Macj The pro ec ion al o alleged ha he acc ed copied he " " of he pe i ioner-pri a e complainan
Fa f d C a i 17 ha : b he e idence ill ho ha here a no ch de ign in he ei ed jean . In ead, ha i ho n i "
." Again, a hor e and a b ffalo are o differen animal hich an ordinar c omer can ea il di ing i h.
In rademark ca e , par ic larl in a cer aining he her one rademark i conf ingl imilar o ano her, no e r le .
can be ded ced beca e each ca e m be decided on i meri . In ch ca e , e en more han in an o her
li iga ion, preceden m be died in he ligh of he fac of he par ic lar ca e. Tha i he rea on h in The pro ec ion f r her alleged ha he red ab a copied b he acc ed. Ho e er, e idence ill ho ha he
rademark ca e , j ri pr den ial preceden ho ld be applied onl o a ca e if he are pecificall in poin . red ab ed b he pri a e complainan indica e he ord "LEVI S" hile ha of he acc ed indica e he le er
"LSJT" hich mean LS JEANS TAILORING. Again, e en an ordinar c omer can di ing i h he ord LEVI S
The ca e of E e a d Ga e Ma fac i g C ai . C f A ea ,1 hich in ol ed an alleged from he le er LSJT.
rademark infringemen of jean prod c , i or h referring o. There, H.D. Lee Co., Inc. (H.D. Lee), a corpora ion
ba ed in he Uni ed S a e of America, claimed ha Emerald Garmen rademark of "STYLISTIC MR. LEE" ha i
ed on i jean prod c a conf ingl imilar o he "LEE" rademark ha H.D. Lee ed on i o n jean In erm of cla e of c omer and channel of rade, he jean prod c of he pri a e complainan and he
prod c . Appl ing he holi ic e , he Co r r led ha here a no infringemen . acc ed ca er o differen cla e of c omer and flo hro gh he differen channel of rade. The c omer of
he pri a e complainan are mall goer belonging o cla A and B marke gro p hile ha of he acc ed are
The holi ic e i applicable here con idering ha he herein criminal ca e al o in ol ed rademark infringemen in
rela ion o jean prod c . Accordingl , he jean rademark of Le i Philippine and Dia m be con idered a a ho e ho belong o cla D and E marke ho can onl afford Php 300 for a pair of made- oorder pan .20 .
hole in de ermining he likelihood of conf ion be een hem. The a g pan or jean made and old b Le i
Moreo er, ba ed on he cer ifica e i ed b he In ellec al Proper Office, "LS JEANS TAILORING" a a
Philippine , hich incl ded LEVI S 501, ere er pop lar in he Philippine . The con ming p blic kne ha he
original LEVI S 501 jean ere nder a foreign brand and q i e e pen i e. S ch jean co ld be p rcha ed onl in regi ered rademark of Dia . He had regi ered hi rademark prior o he filing of he pre en ca e .21 The
mall or bo iq e a read - o- ear i em , and ere no a ailable in ailoring hop like ho e of Dia a ell a In ellec al Proper Office o ld cer ainl no ha e allo ed he regi ra ion had Dia rademark been conf ingl
no acq ired on a "made- o-order" ba i . Under he circ m ance , he con ming p blic co ld ea il di cern if he imilar i h he regi ered rademark for LEVI S 501 jean .
jean ere original or fake LEVI S 501, or ere man fac red b o her brand of jean . Conf ion and decep ion
ere remo e, for, a he Co r ha ob er ed in E e a d Ga e : Gi en he foregoing, i ho ld be plain ha here a no likelihood of conf ion be een he rademark in ol ed.
Thereb , he e idence of g il did no a i f he q an m of proof req ired for a criminal con ic ion, hich i proof
Fir , he prod c in ol ed in he ca e a bar are, in he main, ario kind of jean . The e are no o r ordinar be ond rea onable do b . According o Sec ion 2, R le 133 of he R e f C , proof be ond a rea onable do b
ho ehold i em like ca p, o a ce or oap hich are of minimal co . Maong pan or jean are no doe no mean ch a degree of proof a , e cl ding po ibili of error, prod ce ab ol e cer ain . Moral cer ain
ine pen i e. Accordingl , he ca al b er i predi po ed o be more ca io and di crimina ing in and o ld onl i req ired, or ha degree of proof hich prod ce con ic ion in an nprej diced mind. Con eq en l , Dia
prefer o m ll o er hi p rcha e. Conf ion and decep ion, hen, i le likel . In De M e C ai .C f ho ld be acq i ed of he charge .
A ea , e no ed ha :
HEREFORE, he Co r ACQUITS pe i ioner VICTORIO P. DIA of he crime of infringemen of rademark
.... Among he e, ha e en iall de ermine he a i de of he p rcha er, pecificall hi inclina ion o be charged in Criminal Ca e No. 00-0318 and Criminal Ca e No. 00-0319 for fail re of he S a e o e abli h hi g il
ca io , i he co of he good . To be re, a per on ho b a bo of candie ill no e erci e a m ch care a b proof be ond rea onable do b .
one ho b an e pen i e a ch. A a general r le, an ordinar b er doe no e erci e a m ch pr dence in
b ing an ar icle for hich he pa a fe cen a o a he doe in p rcha ing a more al able hing. E pen i e and No prono ncemen on co of i.
al able i em are normall bo gh onl af er delibera e, compara i e and anal ical in e iga ion. B ma
SO ORDERED.
prod c , lo priced ar icle in ide e, and ma er of e er da p rcha e req iring freq en replacemen are
bo gh b he ca al con mer i ho grea care.... LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
A ocia e J ice
Second, like hi beer, he a erage Filipino con mer generall b hi jean b brand. He doe no a k he ale
clerk for generic jean b for, a , a Le i , G e , Wrangler or e en an Armani. He i , herefore, more or le WE CONCUR:
kno ledgeable and familiar i h hi preference and ill no ea il be di rac ed.
MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO
Finall , in line i h he foregoing di c ion , more credi ho ld be gi en o he "ordinar p rcha er." Ca in hi Chief J ice
par ic lar con ro er , he ordinar p rcha er i no he "comple el n ar con mer" b i he "ordinaril
in elligen b er" con idering he pe of prod c in ol ed. TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
A ocia e J ice A ocia e J ice
The defini ion laid do n in D B ci . Ta Tia B i be er i ed o he pre en ca e. There, he "ordinar
p rcha er" a defined a one "acc ed b , a d he ef e e e e fa i ia i h, he g d in
q e ion. The e of fra d len im la ion i o be fo nd in he likelihood of he decep ion of e e i e BIENVENIDO L. RE ES
ea e ac ai ed i h a e ab i hed de ig a d de i f cha i g he c di i h hich ha de ig A ocia e J ice
ha bee a cia ed. The e i no fo nd in he decep ion, or he po ibili of decep ion, of he per on ho kno
CERTIFICATION
no hing abo he de ign hich ha been co n erfei ed, and ho m be indifferen be een ha and he o her.
The im la ion, in order o be objec ionable, m be ch a appear likel o mi lead he ordinar in elligen b er P r an o Sec ion 13, Ar icle VIII of he Con i ion, I cer if ha he concl ion in he abo e deci ion had been
ho ha a need o ppl and i familiar i h he ar icle ha he eek o p rcha e.1 reached in con l a ion before he ca e a a igned o he ri er of he opinion of he Co r ' Di i ion.
Dia ed he rademark "LS JEANS TAILORING" for he jean he prod ced and old in hi ailoring hop . Hi MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO
rademark a i all and a rall differen from he rademark "LEVI STRAUSS & CO" appearing on he pa ch of Chief J ice
original jean nder he rademark LEVI S 501. The ord "LS" co ld no be conf ed a a deri a i e from "LEVI
STRAUSS" b ir e of he "LS" being connec ed o he ord "TAILORING", hereb openl gge ing ha he
jean bearing he rademark "LS JEANS TAILORING" came or ere bo gh from he ailoring hop of Dia , no
from he mall or bo iq e elling original LEVI S 501 jean o he con ming p blic. F
 1R , pp. 29-32; penned b A ocia e J ice Ramon M. Ba o, Jr., i h A ocia e J ice Andre B. Re e ,
Jr. (no Pre iding J ice) and A ocia e J ice Jo e C. Mendo a (no a Member of he Co r ) conc rring.

2 Id. a 34-36.

3 Id. a 37-56.

4 Record , p. 3.

5 Id. a 9.

6 Id. a 192.

7 Id. a 26-101.

Id. a 98-148.

TSN, No ember 11, 2004, pp. 1-30.

10 R , p. 56.

11 Id. a 10-11.

12 Sec ion 1(e), R le 50, R e fC , ae :

Sec ion 1. G d f di i a f a ea . An appeal ma be di mi ed b he Co r of Appeal , on

i o n mo ion or on ha of he appellee, on he follo ing gro nd :

(e) Fail re of he appellan o er e and file he req ired n mber of copie of hi brief or memorand m
i hin he ime pro ided b he e R le .

13 See, e.g., The G e e f he Ki gd f Be gi . C f A ea , G.R. No. 164150, April 14,

2008, 551 SCRA 223, 242.

14 S cie e De P d i Ne e, S.A. . D , J ., G.R. No. 172276, A g 9, 2010, 627 SCRA 223, 233-234;
ci ing P ce I e a i a , I c. . H hag Re ea ch Ma age e SA, G.R. No. 180073, No ember 25,
2009, 605 SCRA 523, 530.

15 S cie e De P d i Ne e, S.A. . D , J ., id.

16 Id. a 235.

17 G.R. No. 166115, Febr ar 2, 2007, 514 SCRA 95, 107.

1 G.R. No. 100098, December 29, 1995, 251 SCRA 600.

1 Id. a 616-617.

20 R , pp. 19-20.

21 Record , p. 696.

The La hil P jec - A ellan La F nda i n