G.R. No. 129093 - Lina, Jr. vs. Pano

Manila Hotel Corporation (“petitioner”) filed Trademark Application No. 4-2013-003052 for “CHAMPAGNE ROOM” on March 19, 2013.
Le Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (“CIVC”) opposed on November 7, 2013 (Inter Partes Case No. 14-2013-00372), alleging that “Champagne” is a protected appellation of origin, that the mark falsely suggests a connection with CIVC, that it misleads as to quality and geographic origin, and that it is confusingly similar to CIVC’s trade name.

On December 22, 2017, the IPO Adjudication Officer dismissed CIVC’s opposition, ruling that “CHAMPAGNE ROOM” is generic and registrable for restaurant services.
CIVC received the decision on February 2, 2018, and filed a motion for a 10-day extension (to February 22, 2018) to appeal to the IPO Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) Director. Petitioner opposed.

On February 13, 2018, the IPO-BLA Director granted CIVC’s extension motion (no further extensions allowed).
On March 12, 2018, the Director ordered petitioner to file comments within a non-extendible 10-day period.
Petitioner sought certiorari and prohibition in the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 155049) to stop these orders; the CA denied relief on April 13, 2018 and again on July 23, 2018.
Petitioner filed a Rule 45 petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA resolutions as erroneous liberal interpretations of the inter partes rules.

Whether the CA erred in affirming the IPO-BLA Director’s grant of CIVC’s motion for extension of time to file an appeal.
Whether the IPO-BLA Director committed grave abuse of discretion by entertaining and granting that extension.