Philippines: Rules on inter partes proceedings are amended

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Philippines: Rules on inter partes proceedings are amended

Sponsored by

hechanova-400px.png
new-rules-min-final.jpg

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) has just issued Memorandum Circular No. 2019-024 entitled Amendments to the Rules and Regulations on Inter Partes Proceedings, which will take effect on February 15 2020. Its objective is to provide speedy, quality and effective legal remedies to resolve IP disputes. The major amendments are as follows:

Modes of service

Added to the current modes of service which are by registered mail and personally, is courier services. This will apply to filings done by the parties as well as delivery of decisions, final orders and other processes as issued by the IPOPHL.

Refusal to receive notices

If a party refuses to receive the notice to answer or other orders, or has moved out of the address without informing the Bureau of Legal Affairs (Bureau) of its new address, the Bureau shall post the notice or orders on the IPOPHL website, and the compliance of the concerned party shall be presumed from the date of such a posting.

Filing requirements for oppositions and cancellations

Aside from submitting the opposition or petition in writing, this submission must be accompanied by word files of all pleadings together with the pdf files of all supporting documents as stored in a flash drive. For failure to comply with this requirement, the Bureau can reject it within 15 days from receipt and the concerned party shall be given five days to cure said defect.

Apostilled documents

Documents executed outside the Philippines must be apostilled or authenticated by the Philippine Consulate Office.

Assignment of cases

If the respondent is in default, or the case is not resolved through ADR, the Bureau director or in his absence the assistant director shall assign or raffle the case to the adjudication officer.

Authority given to assistant BLA director

The amended rules specifically provide authority to the assistant BLA director to dismiss cases arising from failure of the concerned party to complete or cure defects, such as failure to attach to the opposition or petition the originals of the following documents: verification, certification of non-forum shopping, power of attorney. However, this dismissal can be appealed to the director.

Editha R Hechanova

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Barry Greenbaum, partner at Olshan Frome Wolosky, explains how in-house teams can update their approach to brand development, and where AI can add value
Christine Chiramel, who joins a full-service law firm after 17 years of working at specialist firms, says she’s excited to explore how corporate commercial issues are blurring into IP
Practitioners say increasing the pecuniary jurisdiction of India’s most popular litigation forum to around $2 million would spark unpredictability and make it difficult for SMEs to benefit
The Spain-based firm has appointed an industry veteran to lead the group, which it hopes will strengthen its ability to support clients in ‘disruptive technologies’
Shaina Haria, a final-seat trainee at an international law firm’s UK office, shares how she fell in love with IP and why the area of law has changed the way she views the world
Now in its sixth edition, the IP Case Law Conference was focussed on the notion of ‘growing through change’
Nick Redfearn and Khanh Nguyen of Rouse discuss Vietnam’s latest identification in the 2026 Special 301 Report and how the country is taking genuine steps to meet US expectations
Tatiana Campello reflects on 30 years of practising at the firm, and urges women IP attorneys to think beyond the day-to-day
A David v Goliath battle involving TikTok, and Via Licensing Alliance adding new members to its Voice Codec patent pool, were also among the top talking points
Latham & Watkins bolstered its IP litigation bench in California with the addition of Kieran Kieckhefer, as partner demand for trial-ready expertise shows no sign of slowing
Gift this article