6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Thus, respondent Dotimas is entitled to US$3,360.00 or its equivalent in Philippine currency at the exchange rate prevailing during the time of payment. Lastly, the petitioners argued that the CA committed serious, reversible error of law in not giving them the opportunity to file any comment to respondent's Petition for Certiorari. If the petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is sufficient in form and substance to justify such process, the court shall issue an order requiring the respondent or respondents to comment on the petition within 10 days from receipt. In petitions before this Court and the CA, the court may require the respondents to file their comment to, and not a motion to dismiss, the petition before giving due course thereto. Thereafter, the court may require the filing of a reply and such other responsive or other pleadings as it may deem necessary and proper.[46] It is also provided in the Internal Rules of the CA that in petitions for certiorari, the court may dismiss the petition outright or require the private respondents to file a comment, not a motion to dismiss.[47] Contrary to petitioners' claim, records show that the CA issued a Resolution on August 3, 2004, ordering them to file their Comment within 10 days from notice. As per tracer reply of Postmaster Makati City, petitioners received the Resolution on August 9, 2004. On November 18, 2004, it was noted on the records that no comment was filed.[48] Thus, the CA ordered the parties to submit their respective memoranda within 15 days from notice on November 23, 2004.[49] Lastly, in conformity with current policy and pursuant to the case of Nacar v. Gallery Frames,[50] we impose on "the monetary award for temporary total disability benefit an interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until full satisfaction. WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari, dated March 8, 2010, of petitioners Acomarit Phils. and/or Acomarit Hongkong Limited is hereby PARTLY GRANTED. Accordingly, the Decision and Resolution, dated December 12, 2008 and January 20, 2010, respectively, of the Court of Appeals reversing the Resolutions dated September 30, 2003 and February 23, 2004 of the National Labor Relations Commission and ruling that respondent Gomer L. Dotimas suffered from permanent total disability, thus, entitling him to US$60,000.00, are hereby MODIFIED to the effect that petitioners Acomarit Phils. and/or Acomarit Hongkong Limited are ORDERED to pay, jointly and severally, respondent Gomer L. Dotimas the amount of US$3,360.00, or its Peso equivalent at the exchange rate prevailing at the time of actual payment as disability benefits plus the interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until full satisfaction. SO ORDERED. Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Perez, Perlas-Bernabe, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61059 9/13