G.R. No. L-28499 September 30, 1977
VICTORIAS MILLING COMPANY, INC., petitioner, vs. ONG SU AND THE HONORABLE TIBURCIO S. EVALLE IN HIS CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR OF PATENTS, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Victorias Milling Company, Inc., a domestic corporation engaged in manufacturing and selling refined sugar, is the registered owner of the trademark “VICTORIAS” and a diamond design. Respondent Ong Su, engaged in repacking and selling refined sugar, is the registered owner of the trademark “VALENTINE” and a design. Victorias Milling filed a petition to cancel Ong Su’s registration, alleging that its “Victorias” mark was distinctive and used long before Ong Su’s use. It contended that Ong Su’s “Valentine” registration was obtained fraudulently, falsely suggested a connection with Saint Valentine, and would cause damage through purchaser confusion due to its similarity to the “Victorias” mark, particularly noting the shared use of a diamond design and a red and black color scheme.
The respondent countered that the two marks were different, with no likelihood of confusion. Ong Su asserted prior and continuous use of the “Valentine” mark since before and after World War II. During proceedings, Victorias Milling’s witness testified to the similarity of the bags’ designs and wordings, except for the central words. Ong Su’s witnesses testified they never encountered instances of confusion and that diamond designs were commonly used by various sugar dealers as mere ornamentation, not as source identifiers.

ISSUE

Whether the registration of the trademark “VALENTINE” and design should be cancelled on the grounds of likelihood of confusion, fraud, or false suggestion of connection with an institution.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Director of Patents denying the petition for cancellation. The legal logic centered on the fundamental test for trademark infringement: whether the marks are so similar as to likely cause confusion, mistake, or deception among purchasers. The Court found no such likelihood. The words “VICTORIAS” and “VALENTINE” are distinct in spelling, sound, and connotation. Regarding the diamond design, the Court upheld the Director of Patents’ finding that common geometric shapes like diamonds, when used as backgrounds for word marks, are not inherently distinctive indicia of origin unless they have acquired secondary meaning. The petitioner failed to present evidence that its diamond design alone had acquired such secondary meaning identifying its sugar. The color scheme of red and black was also deemed non-distinctive. The proffered testimony of a single incident of alleged confusion was insufficient to establish a pattern of deception, especially given the evident visual and aural differences. The Court also found no evidence of fraudulent registration, noting Ong Su’s mark was registered earlier. The claim of false suggestion was likewise unsupported. Therefore, concurrent use of the marks did not constitute infringement.