Bethel Grace L.

Popera
Grade 11- STEM

PATENT

Case Digest: Pharmawealth vs. Pfizer (Patent Infringement)

Phil. Pharmawealth, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc. & Pfizer (Phil.), Inc. G.R. No. 167715, 17 November 2010

Facts:

Pfizer is the registered owner of a patent pertaining to Sulbactam Ampicillin. It is marketed under the
brand name “Unasyn.” Sometime in January and February 2003, Pfizer discovered that Pharmawealth
submitted bids for the supply of Sulbactam Ampicillin to several hospitals without the Pfizer’s consent.
Pfizer then demanded that the hospitals cease and desist from accepting such bids. Pfizer also demanded
that Pharmawealth immediately withdraw its bids to supply Sulbactam Ampicillin. Pharmawealth and the
hospitals ignored the demands.

Issues:

a) Can an injunctive relief be issued based on an action of patent infringement when the patent allegedly
infringed has already lapsed?
b) What tribunal has jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Director of Legal Affairs of the Intellectual
Property Office?
c) Is there forum shopping when a party files two actions with two seemingly different causes of action and
yet pray for the same relief?

COPYRIGHT

Court acquits GMA execs accused by ABS-CBN of copyright infringement

LISTED broadcast company GMA Network, Inc. announced on Monday that a Quezon City regional trial
court had acquitted its two executives of copyright infringement charges filed by ABS-CBN Corp.

“The Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 93 acquitted Grace Dela Peña-Reyes and John
Oliver T. Manalastas, who were then GMA Network’s news operations head and news program
manager, respectively,” the media company said in an e-mailed statement.

ABS-CBN filed a copyright infringement complaint against GMA in 2004 for the latter’s coverage of the
homecoming of overseas worker and hostage victim Angelo dela Cruz that year.

“ABS-CBN allowed Reuters Television Service (Reuters) to air the footages it had taken earlier under a
special embargo agreement,” the Court of Appeals said in its summary, as cited by the Supreme Court
in a 2015 decision, where ABS-CBN’s petition to sue Ms. Dela Peña-Reyes and Mr. Manalastas was
granted.

GMA said the complaint stemmed from the “alleged unauthorized and illegal use and broadcast of
ABS-CBN’s footage.” “In the Sept. 29, 2021 decision penned by Presiding Judge Arthur O. Malabaguio,
the court sided with Dela Peña-Reyes and Manalastas, citing ‘the failure of the prosecution to prove
their guilt beyond reasonable doubt,’” GMA said.

“GMA’s use of the said footage was done under a valid subscription agreement with Reuters and CNN,
which allows it to air and re-broadcast these video feeds,” GMA also said, citing Ms. Dela Peña-Reyes
and Mr. Manalastas.
TRADEMARK
Starbucks wins Philippine case over 'Frap' trademark - report
MANILA, Philippines - Global coffee giant Starbucks has won a trademark case against a Philippine
company, which tried to register the name "Frap" for a marketing slogan, BusinessWorld reported on Friday.

Cafe de Manila Corp had filed an application to use the phrase "The Frap Bar Everyone Deserves and
Designs" on its coffee products.

The Intellectual Property Office's Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) ruled in favor of Starbucks in the dispute,
citing the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.

Section 123 (d) of Republic Act No. 8293 provides that " a mark cannot be registered if it is identical with a
registered mark belonging to a different proprietor or a mark with an earlier filing or priority date with
respect of the same goods or services, closely related goods or services, or if it nearly resembles such a mark
as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion."

In its ruling, it said, "Thus Respondent-Applicant (Cafe de Manila) may not appropriate the word FRAP
which constitutes a prefix or dominant part of the Opposer’s (Starbucks) registered trademarks,
FRAPPUCCINO, because this may lead to a likelihood of confusion and deception among the purchasing
public."

This is not the first time Starbucks has gone after companies for getting too close to its trademark
Frappuccino.

In December 2013, CNN reported that a pub owner in Cottleville, Missouri, who served a vanilla creme and
chocolate coffee ale dubbed "Frappicino", received a letter from Starbucks' lawyers asking him to stop using
the name.

"The FRAPPICINO mark only differs from Starbucks Coffee Co.'s FRAPPUCCINO mark by one letter and
is phonetically identical," the letter reportedly stated.