Fil Am World

About Fil Am World

Posts by New Admin:

Manny Pacquiao's Official Twitter Account

Manny Pacquiao’s Official Twitter Account

Fil-Am World Magazine

UPDATE: As of the first week of February 2016, Manny Pacquiao finally acquired the @MannyPacquiao handle of Twitter!

His old photos and tweets from the @MrMannyPacquiao account have been transferred over to @MannyPacquiao.

(Technically, the @MrMannyPacquiao was simply renamed to or given the username @MannyPacquiao.)

The @MrMannyPacquiao handle has been scooped up by someone else who had to start from scratch. It has fewer than a hundred followers.

The “fan” account @MannyPacquiaoTR still has the millions of followers.

Previous story is below.

Manny Pacquiao's Official Twitter Account
Manny Pacquiao’s Official Twitter Account

 

According to Filipino national boxer Manny Pacquiao’s official Facebook page (with the verified checkmark and close to 10 million fans), his official Twitter account is now @MrMannyPacquiao.

 

Manny Pacquiao's New Twitter account
Manny Pacquiao’s New Twitter account

 

The other Manny Pacquiao account on Twitter that was opened in February 2011 and now has 2.55 million followers has been rebranded as a @MannyPacquiaoTR with the Bio stating that it is the “Official FAN Twitter account of Manny Pacquiao” based in the Philippines.

Manny Pacquiao's Fan Account on Twitter
Manny Pacquiao’s Fan Account on Twitter

 

The @MrMannyPacquaio that serves as the pugilist’s current “official” account was opened in July 2015 and has shared more personal and intimate, less promotional photographs. It has about 1,700 followers as of December 9, 2015.

UPDATE: As of the first week of February 2016, Manny Pacquiao finally acquired the @MannyPacquiao handle of Twitter!

His old photos and tweets from the @MrMannyPacquiao account have been transferred over to @MannyPacquiao.

(Technically, the @MrMannyPacquiao was simply renamed to or given the username @MannyPacquiao.)

The @MrMannyPacquiao handle has been scooped up by someone else who had to start from scratch. It has fewer than a hundred followers.

The “fan” account @MannyPacquiaoTR still has the millions of followers.

Ramar Loses Magnolia BMC Issue To San Miguel

Fil-Am World Magazine , , ,

August 27, 2015

The “Butter, Margarine and Cheese” (BMC) Issue:

Northern California’s Ramar Foods Has Been Trying For Years to Prevent San Miguel of the Philippines From Using the Magnolia Brand in the United States

The Ninth Circuit Court reverses the injunction entered in favor of Ramar and affirms the balance of the judgment in favor of San Miguel.

San Miguel Corporation, San Miguel Pure Foods Company, Magnolia Inc., Arko Foods International, Inc., and Rayland Enterprises LLC (collectively, “San Miguel”) filed an action against Ramar International seeking a declaratory judgment that San Miguel’s use of the “Magnolia” trademark on certain food products did not constitute trademark infringement.

Ramar counterclaimed against San Miguel for trademark infringement, false designation of origin and false representation, and unfair competition under California law.

The district court granted partial summary judgment in favor of Ramar, concluding that San Miguel’s use of the Magnolia trademark constituted infringement, subject to affirmative defenses. The issues of whether San Miguel’s infringement was willful and whether damages should be awarded were tried to a jury and resulted in a verdict in favor of San Miguel, concluding that the infringement was not willful and awarding no damages. San Miguel also prevailed before the district court on one of its affirmative defenses, the equitable defense of laches, based on Ramar’s delay in objecting to San Miguel’s use of the trademark on butter, margarine, and cheese products (“BMC”) sold in the United States. In the end, San Miguel prevailed for the most part, but the district court did grant Ramar a limited prospective injunction against San Miguel’s use of the Magnolia mark in the United States for food services and products other than the BMC products.

Ramar appealed, challenging the district court’s denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law as to willful infringement, the jury’s verdict finding no willful infringement, the district court’s judgment in favor of San Miguel on its laches defense, and the BMC exception to the permanent injunction against San Miguel’s use of the Magnolia trademark. San Miguel cross-appealed, disputing the permanent injunction in favor of Ramar.

The Ninth Circuit Court reverses the injunction entered in favor of Ramar and affirms the balance of the judgment in favor of San Miguel.

Download a PDF file of the court’s decision.

More

Gary Menes’s Twitter Rant Against Customer

Fil-Am World Magazine

May 16, Saturday… Gary Menes had a customer seated at 6:00 pm who reportedly had to wait for around 30 minutes.

Instead of apologizing for the delay as any normal restaurant person would… these tweets were posted by Gary Menes himself while in the kitchen around 8:30 pm while there were other customers in the same restaurant.

Thoroughly inappropriate behavior considering the circumstances.

Bizarre…

The customer’s later tweets may have gone into insulting territory, but it would not have escalated at all without Gary Menes initiating the escalation.

Gary Menes vs John DiMaggio
Gary Menes vs Customer on Twitter

U.S. Company Blocks San Miguel on Magnolia!!!

Blog , , ,

Magnolia is a Philippine ice-cream brand whose origins clearly go back to the 1920s. It has belonged to the San Miguel Corporation for most of its history.

IP Philippines Registration No. 42004005904
San Miguel Corporation, Philippines
Source: World Intellectual Property Organization

In the 1970s, a completely unaffiliated Filipino American family in Northern California started marking their own ice-cream products with the “Magnolia” name in order to surf on the goodwill that the original Magnolia had developed among Filipinos from the old country. (This assertion was voiced by U.S. federal judge Richard Clifton himself during oral arguments in Case No. 13-55537.)

The Filipino American family Quesada, operating as the Ramar company, filed a trademark application in the early 1990’s claiming the Magnolia mark for their exclusive use in the United States, based on their use of that name and logo for decades. The fact that San Miguel had been using the Magnolia name and logo for much longer in the Philippines and was the originator of that brand name was irrelevant under U.S. law. 

USA trademark serial number: 74297882
Ramar Foods, California, USA
Source: Trademarkia

To this day, many Filipino Americans assume that the Magnolia ice-cream they eat in the United States is related to the Magnolia in the Philippines. It is not.

The U.S. brand name and company logo are strikingly similar to the homeland’s original, but it is California’s Ramar Foods, and not the Philippines’ San Miguel, that’s profiting. Ramar’s rationale behind the appropriation is that San Miguel “did not have the vision to know they could sell to Filipinos here.” In effect, brand-name piracy is considered smart business sense in the United States. It may be unethical, but it’s legal.

In 2005, the Wall Street Journal focused on this particular brand-name piracy issue, in which companies in the United States appropriate trademarks from overseas. The article noted that the trend has been buoyed by U.S. immigrants who favor buying the traditional brands they cherished in their home countries. Not surprisingly, these consumers are quick to assume that a product in the U.S. with a name from home is the product they grew up with. In this case, it is not.

More

Transcript: San Miguel Philippines vs. Ramar Foods USA

Fil-Am World Magazine

Summary: United States company isn’t content with just appropriating the Magnolia ice-cream brand from the Filipino originator, Ramar USA also wants to prevent San Miguel Philippines from selling Magnolia-branded butter, margarine and cheese in the United States.

 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Case Name: San Miguel Pure Foods Co., et al v. Ramar Int’l Corp., et al
Case Number: 13-55537
Case Panel: NELSON, TASHIMA, CLIFTON
Hearing Location: Pasadena, CA
Hearing Date: 04/07/2015

Ramar International Corp. asked the Ninth Circuit to broaden an injunction in the fight over its “Magnolia” trademark, saying that allowing rival San Miguel Pure Foods Co. to sell certain dairy products under the “Magnolia” name is diluting its trademark.

JUDGE NELSON: “Does the record show why Ramar waited so long to object to San Miguel’s use
of the label on butter, margarine, and cheese? How can San Miguel’s infringement be willful if San Miguel knew that Ramar knew of the products and didn’t object?”

LAWYER: “We didn’t know… We challenged San Miguel in the 1990s on ice cream… We sued their distributor… San Miguel sued us in the 1990s… We found a distributor in the 1990s… The first time we found out about the butter, margarine and cheese was in 2009 when Susie Quesada was sent information about various other products. Her testimony was that, ‘We were absolutely stunned… been through this with them before.'”

JUDGE CLIFTON: “How did your client come up with the Magnolia name and the trademark?”

LAWYER: “We adopted the Magnolia name in the early 1970s.”

JUDGE CLIFTON: “Where did it come from? They liked a certain kind of trees?”

LAWYER: “No, Your Honor. It came from the fact that there was a Magnolia product in the Philippines starting in the 1920s, and that product was not available for sale here, so my clients who were immigrants adopted the mark because they were selling ice-cream products that had flavors that reminded Filipinos of the flavors they could get at home.”

32:15
JUDGE CLIFTON: “Or it helps you… Because let’s face it. Your client is surfing on the goodwill established 40 years ago. Now it may have developed the brand past that, but it’s not like they think the Magnolia trademark used by somebody else is a drag on them. Because they picked it up from San Miguel’s usage in the first place.”

Ramar’s lawyer insinuates before the court that San Miguel will be selling “moldy cheese” under the Magnolia brand in the United States. Though repeatedly being reminded that product quality is of no relevance to the legal points being debated, Ramar’s lawyer keeps sneaking in the innuendo that products made by San Miguel, a major Philippine company with a long history of consumer trust in Asia, are inferior.

TRANSCRIPTION TO BE POSTED IN FULL. CURRENTLY ONLY EXCERPTS ON THIS PAGE.

RECAP OF THE MAGNOLIA ISSUE HERE

0011547440006

U.S. Circuit Judges Dorothy Wright Nelson, Richard Clifton and A. Wallace Tashima sat on the panel for the Ninth Circuit.

San Miguel is represented by Allan Gabriel, Walead Esmail and Craig Nevin Hentschel of Dykema Gossett PLLC.

Ramar is represented by Mark A. Lemley and Alex J. Feerst of Durie Tangri LLP, and Rachel R. Davidson, Holly Hogan and J. Michael Keyes of K&L Gates LLP.

The case is San Miguel Pure Foods Co. et. al. v. Ramar International Corp. et al., case number 13-55537, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

13-55537
13-55965 San Miguel Pure Foods Co. v. Ramar Int’l Corp. – Ramar International Corp. appeals, and San Miguel Pure Foods Co. and others cross-appeal, the district court’s judgment on claims of infringement of “Magnolia” trademarks for ice cream and other foods. [2:11-cv-09747-RGK-FMO]

2015-04-07 9:00 am Courtroom 2, Richard H. Chambers US Court of Appeals, Pasadena
Before: D.W. NELSON, TASHIMA and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges

1 2