The Court of Appeals (CA) has dismissed a case filed by Jollibee Foods Corp. over its legal stare-down against a local firm seeking to register “JB Jolly Bear” as a trademark after the fast-food giant failed to file a petition questioning the ruling of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO).
The CA ordered the case withdrawn from its docket as Jollibee failed to file a petition and comply with court directives despite being granted an extension, as stated in a resolution dated December 6 and written by Associate Justice Angelene Mary Quimpo-Sale.
The IPO in June 2020 noted that JB Jolly Bear and its owner, Huan SIek Sy, failed to file a three-year Declaration of Actual Use of the “JB Jolly Bear” trademark.
Sy manifested that the suit brought by Jollibee against him should be declared moot and academic.
Jollibee, however, said despite the abandonment of the trademark application by JB Jolly Bear, the case should still be decided by the IPO on its merits, adding that it “poses a serious hazard” to its trademark rights and “creates a confusing precedent for similar cases in the future.”
The IPO, through Director General Rowel Barba, dismissed Jollibee’s suit as “no practical or useful purpose would be served by resolving the issues and merits in the case” since the JB Jolly Bear trademark application was already deemed refused.
“It is unnecessary to indulge in academic discussion of a case presenting a moot question as a judgment thereon cannot have any practical legal effect or, in the nature of things, cannot be enforced,” Barba said.
Unsatisfied, Jollibee sought more time to question the IPO ruling before the CA.
On Sept. 17, 2020, the CA granted Jollibee’s motion for an extension of time to file a petition for review.
It also gave the firm five days to complete the filing by remitting the full payment of docket fees, among other requirements.
“The last day to file the petition was on July 22, 2020. To date, or 17 months later, still no petition has been filed and no compliance has been made,” the CA said.
“As a rule, periods prescribed to do certain acts must be followed with fealty as these are designed primarily to speed up the final disposition of the case,” it added, declaring the case “abandoned and accordingly dismissed.”
Source: Philippines News Agency