LAW CN A1LN1S

G k No 126627 August 14 2003

SMI1n kLINL 8LCkMAN CCkCkA1ICN pet|t|oner vs 1nL nCNCkA8LL CCUk1
CI ALALS and 1kCC nAkMA CCkCkA1ICN respondents
SmlLh kllne 8eckman CorporaLlon (peLlLloner) a corporaLlon exlsLlng by vlrLue of
Lhe laws of Lhe sLaLe of ennsylvanla unlLed SLaLes of Amerlca (uS) and llcensed
Lo do buslness ln Lhe hlllpplnes flled on CcLober 8 1976 as asslgnee before Lhe
hlllpplne aLenL Cfflce (now 8ureau of aLenLs 1rademarks and 1echnology
1ransfer) an appllcaLlon for paLenL over an lnvenLlon enLlLled MeLhods and
ComposlLlons for roduclng 8lphaslc araslLlclde AcLlvlLy uslng MeLhyl 3 ropylLhlo
28enzlmldazole CarbamaLe" 1he appllcaLlon bore Serlal no 18989
Cn SepLember 24 1981 LeLLers aLenL no 143611 for Lhe aforesald lnvenLlon
was lssued Lo peLlLloner for a Lerm of sevenLeen (17) years
1he leLLers paLenL provldes ln lLs clalms2 LhaL Lhe paLenLed lnvenLlon conslsLed of
a new compound named meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe and Lhe
meLhods or composlLlons uLlllzlng Lhe compound as an acLlve lngredlenL ln flghLlng
lnfecLlons caused by gasLrolnLesLlnal paraslLes and lungworms ln anlmals such as
swlne sheep caLLle goaLs horses and even peL anlmals
1ryco harma CorporaLlon (prlvaLe respondenL) ls a domesLlc corporaLlon LhaL
manufacLures dlsLrlbuLes and sells veLerlnary producLs lncludlng lmpregon a drug
LhaL has Albendazole for lLs acLlve lngredlenL and ls clalmed Lo be effecLlve agalnsL
gasLrolnLesLlnal roundworms lungworms Lapeworms and fluke lnfesLaLlon ln
carabaos caLLle and goaLs
eLlLloner sued prlvaLe respondenL for lnfrlngemenL of paLenL and unfalr
compeLlLlon before Lhe Caloocan ClLy 8eglonal 1rlal CourL (81C)3 lL clalmed LhaL
lLs paLenL covers or lncludes Lhe subsLance Albendazole such LhaL prlvaLe
respondenL by manufacLurlng selllng uslng and causlng Lo be sold and used Lhe
drug lmpregon wlLhouL lLs auLhorlzaLlon lnfrlnged Clalms 2 3 4 7 8 and 9 of
LeLLers aLenL no 143614 as well as commlLLed unfalr compeLlLlon under ArLlcle
189 paragraph 1 of Lhe 8evlsed enal Code and SecLlon 29 of 8epubllc AcL no 166
(1he 1rademark Law) for adverLlslng and selllng as lLs own Lhe drug lmpregon
alLhough Lhe same conLalned peLlLloner's paLenLed Albendazole3
Cn moLlon of peLlLloner 8ranch 123 of Lhe Caloocan 81C lssued a Lemporary
resLralnlng order agalnsL prlvaLe respondenL en[olnlng lL from commlLLlng acLs of
paLenL lnfrlngemenL and unfalr compeLlLlon6 A wrlL of prellmlnary ln[uncLlon was
subsequenLly lssued7
rlvaLe respondenL ln lLs Answer8 averred LhaL LeLLers aLenL no 14361 does noL
cover Lhe subsLance Albendazole for nowhere ln lL does LhaL word appear LhaL
even lf Lhe paLenL were Lo lnclude Albendazole such subsLance ls unpaLenLable
LhaL Lhe 8ureau of lood and urugs allowed lL Lo manufacLure and markeL lmpregon
wlLh Albendazole as lLs known lngredlenL LhaL Lhere ls no proof LhaL lL passed off ln
any way lLs veLerlnary producLs as Lhose of peLlLloner LhaL LeLLers aLenL no
14361 ls null and vold Lhe appllcaLlon for Lhe lssuance Lhereof havlng been flled
beyond Lhe one year perlod from Lhe flllng of an appllcaLlon abroad for Lhe same
lnvenLlon covered Lhereby ln vlolaLlon of SecLlon 13 of 8epubllc AcL no 163 (1he
aLenL Law) and LhaL peLlLloner ls noL Lhe reglsLered paLenL holder
rlvaLe respondenL lodged a CounLerclalm agalnsL peLlLloner for such amounL of
acLual damages as may be proven 100000000 ln moral damages 30000000
ln exemplary damages and 13000000 ln aLLorney's fees
llndlng for prlvaLe respondenL Lhe Lrlal courL rendered a ueclslon daLed !uly 23
19919 Lhe dlsposlLlve porLlon of whlch reads
WnLkLICkL |n v|ew of the forego|ng p|a|nt|ff's comp|a|nt shou|d be as |t |s
hereby DISMISSLD 1he Wr|t of |n[unct|on |ssued |n connect|on w|th the case |s
hereby ordered DISSCLVLD
1he LeLLers aLenL no 14361 lssued by Lhe Lhen hlllpplne aLenLs Cfflce ls hereby
declared null and vold for belng ln vlolaLlon of SecLlons 7 9 and 13 of Lhe aLenLs
Law
ursuanL Lo Sec 46 of Lhe aLenLs Law Lhe ulrecLor of 8ureau of aLenLs ls hereby
dlrecLed Lo cancel LeLLers aLenL no 14361 lssued Lo Lhe plalnLlff and Lo publlsh
such cancellaLlon ln Lhe Cfflclal CazeLLe
uefendanL 1ryco harmaceuLlcal CorporaLlon ls hereby awarded 33000000 acLual
damages and 10000000 aLLorney's fees as prayed for ln lLs counLerclalm buL sald
amounL awarded Lo defendanL ls sub[ecL Lo Lhe llen on correcL paymenL of flllng
fees
SC CkDLkLD (underscorlng supplled)
Cn appeal Lhe CourL of Appeals by ueclslon of Aprll 21 199310 upheld Lhe Lrlal
courL's flndlng LhaL prlvaLe respondenL was noL llable for any lnfrlngemenL of Lhe
paLenL of peLlLloner ln llghL of Lhe laLLer's fallure Lo show LhaL Albendazole ls Lhe
same as Lhe compound sub[ecL of LeLLers aLenL no 14361 noLlng peLlLloner's
admlsslon of Lhe lssuance by Lhe uS of a paLenL for Albendazole ln Lhe name of
SmlLh kllne and lrench LaboraLorles whlch was peLlLloner's former corporaLe name
Lhe appellaLe courL consldered Lhe uS paLenL as lmplylng LhaL Albendazole ls
dlfferenL from meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe lL llkewlse found
LhaL prlvaLe respondenL was noL gullLy of decelvlng Lhe publlc by mlsrepresenLlng
LhaL lmpregon ls lLs producL
1he appellaLe courL however declared LhaL LeLLers aLenL no 14361 was noL vold
as lL susLalned peLlLloner's explanaLlon LhaL aLenL AppllcaLlon Serlal no 18989
whlch was flled on CcLober 8 1976 was a dlvlslonal appllcaLlon of aLenL
AppllcaLlon Serlal no 17280 flled on !une 17 1973 wlLh Lhe hlllpplne aLenL
Cfflce well wlLhln one year from peLlLloner's flllng on !une 19 1974 of lLs lorelgn
AppllcaLlon rlorlLy uaLa no 480646 ln Lhe uS coverlng Lhe same compound
sub[ecL of aLenL AppllcaLlon Serlal no 17280
Applylng SecLlon 17 of Lhe aLenL Law Lhe CourL of Appeals Lhus ruled LhaL aLenL
AppllcaLlon Serlal no 18989 was deemed flled on !une 17 1993 or sLlll wlLhln one
year from Lhe flllng of a paLenL appllcaLlon abroad ln compllance wlLh Lhe oneyear
rule under SecLlon 13 of Lhe aLenL Law And lL re[ecLed Lhe submlsslon LhaL Lhe
compound ln LeLLers aLenL no 14361 was noL paLenLable clLlng Lhe
[urlsprudenLlally esLabllshed presumpLlon LhaL Lhe aLenL Cfflce's deLermlnaLlon of
paLenLablllLy ls correcL llnally lL ruled LhaL peLlLloner esLabllshed lLself Lo be Lhe
one and Lhe same asslgnee of Lhe paLenL noLwlLhsLandlng changes ln lLs corporaLe
name 1hus Lhe appellaLe courL dlsposed
WnLkLICkL the [udgment appea|ed from |s AIIIkMLD w|th the MCDIIICA1ICN
that the orders for the nu|||f|cat|on of Letters atent No 14S61 and for |ts
cance||at|on are de|eted therefrom
SC CkDLkLD
eLlLloner's moLlon for reconslderaLlon of Lhe CourL of Appeals' declslon havlng
been denled11 Lhe presenL peLlLlon for revlew on cerLlorarl12 was flled
asslgnlng as errors Lhe followlng
I 1nL CCUk1 CI ALALS GkAVLL LkkLD IN NC1 IINDING 1nA1
AL8LNDA2CLL 1nL AC1IVL INGkLDILN1 IN 1kCC'S "IMkLGCN" DkUG IS
INCLUDLD IN L1I1ICNLk'S LL11LkS A1LN1 NC 14S61 AND 1nA1
CCNSLULN1L 1kCC IS ANSWLkA8LL ICk A1LN1 INIkINGLMLN1
II 1nL CCUk1 CI ALALS GkAVLL LkkLD IN AWAkDING 1C kIVA1L
kLSCNDLN1 1kCC nAkMA CCkCkA1ICN 33000000 AC1UAL DAMAGLS
AND 10000000 A11CkNL'S ILLS
eLlLloner argues LhaL under Lhe docLrlne of equlvalenLs for deLermlnlng paLenL
lnfrlngemenL Albendazole Lhe acLlve lngredlenL lL alleges was approprlaLed by
prlvaLe respondenL for lLs drug lmpregon ls subsLanLlally Lhe same as meLhyl 3
propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe covered by lLs paLenL slnce boLh of Lhem are
meanL Lo combaL worm or paraslLe lnfesLaLlon ln anlmals lL clLes Lhe unrebuLLed"
LesLlmony of lLs wlLness ur Codofredo C Crlnlon (ur Crlnlon) LhaL Lhe chemlcal
formula ln LeLLers aLenL no 14361 refers Lo Lhe compound Albendazole
eLlLloner adds LhaL Lhe Lwo subsLances subsLanLlally do Lhe same funcLlon ln
subsLanLlally Lhe same way Lo achleve Lhe same resulLs Lhereby maklng Lhem Lruly
ldenLlcal eLlLloner Lhus submlLs LhaL Lhe appellaLe courL should have gone beyond
Lhe llLeral wordlngs used ln LeLLers aLenL no 14361 beyond merely applylng Lhe
llLeral lnfrlngemenL LesL for ln splLe of Lhe facL LhaL Lhe word Albendazole does noL
appear ln peLlLloner's leLLers paLenL lL has ably shown by evldence lLs sameness
wlLh meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe
eLlLloner llkewlse polnLs ouL LhaL lLs appllcaLlon wlLh Lhe hlllpplne aLenL Cfflce
on accounL of whlch lL was granLed LeLLers aLenL no 14361 was merely a
dlvlslonal appllcaLlon of a prlor appllcaLlon ln Lhe u S whlch granLed a paLenL for
Albendazole Pence peLlLloner concludes LhaL boLh meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2
benzlmldazole carbamaLe and Lhe uSpaLenLed Albendazole are dependenL on
each oLher and muLually conLrlbuLe Lo produce a slngle resulL Lhereby maklng
Albendazole as much a parL of LeLLers aLenL no 14361 as Lhe oLher subsLance ls
eLlLloner concedes ln lLs Sur8e[olnder13 LhaL alLhough meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2
benzlmldazole carbamaLe ls noL ldenLlcal wlLh Albendazole Lhe former ls an
lmprovemenL or lmproved verslon of Lhe laLLer Lhereby maklng boLh subsLances sLlll
subsLanLlally Lhe same

JlLh respecL Lo Lhe award of acLual damages ln favor of prlvaLe respondenL ln Lhe
amounL of 33000000 represenLlng losL proflLs peLlLloner assalls Lhe same as
hlghly speculaLlve and con[ecLural hence wlLhouL basls lL assalls Loo Lhe award of
10000000 ln aLLorney's fees as noL falllng under any of Lhe lnsLances enumeraLed
by law where recovery of aLLorney's fees ls allowed
ln lLs CommenL14 prlvaLe respondenL conLends LhaL appllcaLlon of Lhe docLrlne of
equlvalenLs would noL alLer Lhe ouLcome of Lhe case Albendazole and meLhyl 3
propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe belng Lwo dlfferenL compounds wlLh
dlfferenL chemlcal and physlcal properLles lL sLresses LhaL Lhe exlsLence of a
separaLe uS paLenL for Albendazole lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe same and Lhe compound ln
LeLLers aLenL no 14361 are dlfferenL from each oLher and LhaL slnce lL was on
accounL of a dlvlslonal appllcaLlon LhaL Lhe paLenL for meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2
benzlmldazole carbamaLe was lssued Lhen by deflnlLlon of a dlvlslonal appllcaLlon
such a compound ls [usL one of several lndependenL lnvenLlons alongslde
Albendazole under peLlLloner's orlglnal paLenL appllcaLlon
As has repeaLedly been held only quesLlons of law may be ralsed ln a peLlLlon for
revlew on cerLlorarl before Lhls CourL unless Lhe facLual flndlngs of Lhe appellaLe
courL are mlsLaken absurd speculaLlve con[ecLural confllcLlng LalnLed wlLh grave
abuse of dlscreLlon or conLrary Lo Lhe flndlngs culled by Lhe courL of orlgln13 Lhls
CourL does noL revlew Lhem
lrom an examlnaLlon of Lhe evldence on record Lhls CourL flnds noLhlng lnflrm ln
Lhe appellaLe courL's concluslons wlLh respecL Lo Lhe prlnclpal lssue of wheLher
prlvaLe respondenL commlLLed paLenL lnfrlngemenL Lo Lhe pre[udlce of peLlLloner
1he burden of proof Lo subsLanLlaLe a charge for paLenL lnfrlngemenL resLs on Lhe
plalnLlff16 ln Lhe case aL bar peLlLloner's evldence conslsLs prlmarlly of lLs LeLLers
aLenL no 14361 and Lhe LesLlmony of ur Crlnlon lLs general manager ln Lhe
hlllpplnes for lLs Anlmal PealLh roducLs ulvlslon by whlch lL soughL Lo show LhaL
lLs paLenL for Lhe compound meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe also
covers Lhe subsLance Albendazole
lrom a readlng of Lhe 9 clalms of LeLLers aLenL no 14361 ln relaLlon Lo Lhe oLher
porLlons Lhereof no menLlon ls made of Lhe compound Albendazole All LhaL Lhe
clalms dlsclose are Lhe covered lnvenLlon LhaL ls Lhe compound meLhyl 3
propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe Lhe compound's belng anLhelmlnLlc buL
nonLoxlc for anlmals or lLs ablllLy Lo desLroy paraslLes wlLhouL harmlng Lhe hosL
anlmals and Lhe paLenLed meLhods composlLlons or preparaLlons lnvolvlng Lhe
compound Lo maxlmlze lLs efflcacy agalnsL cerLaln klnds of paraslLes lnfecLlng
speclfled anlmals
Jhen Lhe language of lLs clalms ls clear and dlsLlncL Lhe paLenLee ls bound Lhereby
and may noL clalm anyLhlng beyond Lhem17 And so are Lhe courLs bound whlch
may noL add Lo or deLracL from Lhe clalms maLLers noL expressed or necessarlly
lmplled nor may Lhey enlarge Lhe paLenL beyond Lhe scope of LhaL whlch Lhe
lnvenLor clalmed and Lhe paLenL offlce allowed even lf Lhe paLenLee may have been
enLlLled Lo someLhlng more Lhan Lhe words lL had chosen would lnclude18
lL bears sLresslng LhaL Lhe mere absence of Lhe word Albendazole ln LeLLers aLenL
no 14361 ls noL deLermlnaLlve of Albendazole's nonlncluslon ln Lhe clalms of Lhe
paLenL Jhlle Albendazole ls admlLLedly a chemlcal compound LhaL exlsLs by a
name dlfferenL from LhaL covered ln peLlLloner's leLLers paLenL Lhe language of
LeLLer aLenL no 14361 falls Lo yleld anyLhlng aL all regardlng Albendazole And no
exLrlnslc evldence had been adduced Lo prove LhaL Albendazole lnheres ln
peLlLloner's paLenL ln splLe of lLs omlsslon Lherefrom or LhaL Lhe meanlng of Lhe
clalms of Lhe paLenL embraces Lhe same
Jhlle peLlLloner concedes LhaL Lhe mere llLeral wordlngs of lLs paLenL cannoL
esLabllsh prlvaLe respondenL's lnfrlngemenL lL urges Lhls CourL Lo apply Lhe
docLrlne of equlvalenLs
1he docLrlne of equlvalenLs provldes LhaL an lnfrlngemenL also Lakes place when a
devlce approprlaLes a prlor lnvenLlon by lncorporaLlng lLs lnnovaLlve concepL and
alLhough wlLh some modlflcaLlon and change performs subsLanLlally Lhe same
funcLlon ln subsLanLlally Lhe same way Lo achleve subsLanLlally Lhe same resulL19
?eL agaln a scruLlny of peLlLloner's evldence falls Lo convlnce Lhls CourL of Lhe
subsLanLlal sameness of peLlLloner's paLenLed compound and Albendazole Jhlle
boLh compounds have Lhe effecL of neuLrallzlng paraslLes ln anlmals ldenLlLy of
resulL does noL amounL Lo lnfrlngemenL of paLenL unless Albendazole operaLes ln
subsLanLlally Lhe same way or by subsLanLlally Lhe same means as Lhe paLenLed
compound even Lhough lL performs Lhe same funcLlon and achleves Lhe same
resulL20 ln oLher words Lhe prlnclple or mode of operaLlon musL be Lhe same or
subsLanLlally Lhe same21
1he docLrlne of equlvalenLs Lhus requlres saLlsfacLlon of Lhe funcLlonmeansand
resulL LesL Lhe paLenLee havlng Lhe burden Lo show LhaL all Lhree componenLs of
such equlvalency LesL are meL22
As sLaLed early on peLlLloner's evldence falls Lo explaln how Albendazole ls ln every
essenLlal deLall ldenLlcal Lo meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe AparL
from Lhe facL LhaL Albendazole ls an anLhelmlnLlc agenL llke meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2
benzlmldazole carbamaLe noLhlng more ls asserLed and accordlngly subsLanLlaLed
regardlng Lhe meLhod or means by whlch Albendazole weeds ouL paraslLes ln
anlmals Lhus glvlng no lnformaLlon on wheLher LhaL meLhod ls subsLanLlally Lhe
same as Lhe manner by whlch peLlLloner's compound works 1he LesLlmony of ur
Crlnlon lends no supporL Lo peLlLloner's cause he noL havlng been presenLed or
quallfled as an experL wlLness who has Lhe knowledge or experLlse on Lhe maLLer of
chemlcal compounds
As for Lhe concepL of dlvlslonal appllcaLlons proffered by peLlLloner lL comes lnLo
play when Lwo or more lnvenLlons are clalmed ln a slngle appllcaLlon buL are of
such a naLure LhaL a slngle paLenL may noL be lssued for Lhem23 1he appllcanL
Lhus ls requlred Lo dlvlde" LhaL ls Lo llmlL Lhe clalms Lo whlchever lnvenLlon he
may elecL whereas Lhose lnvenLlons noL elecLed may be made Lhe sub[ecL of
separaLe appllcaLlons whlch are called dlvlslonal appllcaLlons"24 JhaL Lhls only
means ls LhaL peLlLloner's meLhyl 3 propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe ls an
lnvenLlon dlsLlncL from Lhe oLher lnvenLlons clalmed ln Lhe orlglnal appllcaLlon
dlvlded ouL Albendazole belng one of Lhose oLher lnvenLlons CLherwlse meLhyl 3
propylLhlo2benzlmldazole carbamaLe would noL have been Lhe sub[ecL of a
dlvlslonal appllcaLlon lf a slngle paLenL could have been lssued for lL as well as
Albendazole

1he foregolng dlscusslons noLwlLhsLandlng Lhls CourL does noL susLaln Lhe award of
acLual damages and aLLorney's fees ln favor of prlvaLe respondenL 1he clalmed
acLual damages of 33000000 represenLlng losL proflLs or revenues lncurred by
prlvaLe respondenL as a resulL of Lhe lssuance of Lhe ln[uncLlon agalnsL lL compuLed
aL Lhe raLe of 30 of lLs alleged 10000000 monLhly gross sales for eleven monLhs
were supporLed by Lhe LesLlmonles of prlvaLe respondenL's resldenL23 and
LxecuLlve vlceresldenL LhaL Lhe average monLhly sale of lmpregon was
10000000 and LhaL sales plummeLed Lo zero afLer Lhe lssuance of Lhe
ln[uncLlon26 Jhlle lndemnlflcaLlon for acLual or compensaLory damages covers
noL only Lhe loss suffered (damnum emergens) buL also proflLs whlch Lhe obllgee
falled Lo obLaln (lucrum cessans or ganaclas frusLradas) lL ls necessary Lo prove Lhe
acLual amounL of damages wlLh a reasonable degree of cerLalnLy based on
compeLenL proof and on Lhe besL evldence obLalnable by Lhe ln[ured parLy27 1he
LesLlmonles of prlvaLe respondenL's offlcers are noL Lhe compeLenL proof or besL
evldence obLalnable Lo esLabllsh lLs rlghL Lo acLual or compensaLory damages for
such damages also requlre presenLaLlon of documenLary evldence Lo subsLanLlaLe a
clalm Lherefor28
ln Lhe same veln Lhls CourL does noL susLaln Lhe granL by Lhe appellaLe courL of
aLLorney's fees Lo prlvaLe respondenL anchored on ArLlcle 2208 (2) of Lhe Clvll Code
prlvaLe respondenL havlng been allegedly forced Lo llLlgaLe as a resulL of peLlLloner's
sulL Lven lf a clalmanL ls compelled Lo llLlgaLe wlLh Lhlrd persons or Lo lncur
expenses Lo proLecL lLs rlghLs sLlll aLLorney's fees may noL be awarded where no
sufflclenL showlng of bad falLh could be reflecLed ln a parLy's perslsLence ln a case
oLher Lhan an erroneous convlcLlon of Lhe rlghLeousness of hls cause29 1here
exlsLs no evldence on record lndlcaLlng LhaL peLlLloner was moved by mallce ln
sulng prlvaLe respondenL
1hls CourL however granLs prlvaLe respondenL LemperaLe or moderaLe damages ln
Lhe amounL of 2000000 whlch lL flnds reasonable under Lhe clrcumsLances lL
havlng suffered some pecunlary loss Lhe amounL of whlch cannoL from Lhe naLure
of Lhe case be esLabllshed wlLh cerLalnLy30

WnLkLICkL the assa||ed dec|s|on of the Court of Appea|s |s hereby AIIIkMLD
w|th MCDIIICA1ICN 1he award of actua| or compensatory damages and
attorney's fees to pr|vate respondent 1ryco harma Corporat|on |s DLLL1LD
|nstead |t |s hereby awarded the amount of 2000000 as temperate or
moderate damages

SC CkDLkLD