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

Cookies Settings

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

Six hires across the IP spectrum reflect Orrick’s efforts to better serve tech clients across the IP lifecycle
David Stone, partner at White & Case, argues that the government’s planned reforms will modernise and futureproof UK design law, but leave two of the thorniest problems unresolved
Max Scott will join the firm’s IP transactions group in California, becoming the latest Weil IP partner to secure their future
Yonatan Drori, attorney at Drori-Stav IP in Israel, explains why foreign counsel must treat Israel’s patent disclosure requirements as an ongoing obligation, rather than a one-off formality
From Japan to Southeast Asia, domestic and regional firms picked up some of the biggest prizes, while key foreign players maintained momentum
Earlier this month, Managing IP had exclusively reported that the French arm of Taylor Wessing was minded to pull out of the deal
Our latest podcast examines how Weil’s IP practice evolved, where its practitioners could (and will) go next, and which firms and markets stand to benefit from the redistribution of talent
Former Latham partner Chris Henry and transactions lawyer Liza Cotter are heading to the firm as Weil’s IP practice starts to disperse
Rival IP teams return to court for a closely watched appeal over AI and copyright, but observers hoping for answers to some of the technology’s biggest legal questions may be left disappointed
Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Gift this article