1/5/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly 2. Very recently, it has come to the Supreme Court and ICAB entered treatment of foreigners who reside in adoption through the courts. Attached attention of the Petitioners that the into an agreement regarding the the Philippines and file a petition for as Annex "A" is a copy of the DSWD Memorandum dated 1 June 2018,[18] which refers to this agreement. 3. Accordingly, in reference to OCA Circular 213-2017, foreigners who reside in the Philippines should secure a certification from their Foreign Adoption Agencies and/or Embassies that since they are not residents in their countries and they are residing in the Philippines, the said agencies could not issue the documents required by the domestic courts in support of their Petition for domestic adoption. "If ever their cases will be endorsed to ICAB by the court, ICAB will file a manifestation on this matter so that the domestic adoption could be pursued." 4. In light of this supervening event, Petitioners pray for a reconsideration of the Order dated 19 June 2018 and that they be given thirty (30) days from notice to secure the necessary certification.[19] (Emphasis supplied) In an Order[20] dated July 10, 2018, respondent Judge denied the foregoing Manifestation and Second Motion for Reconsideration for being a prohibited pleading. Petitioners received a copy of said Order on July 19, 2018. Petitioners pointed out that they have 60 days from receipt of the Order, or until September 17, 2018, to file a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, with the CA.[21] Ruling of the Court of Appeals On September 12, 2018, petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court with the CA, which assailed respondent Judge's Orders dated September 11, 2017, June 19, 2018, and July 10, 2018.[22] However, in its November 21, 2018 Resolution, the CA dismissed the Petition for Certiorari for being filed out of time. The CA reasoned that the 60-day period should have been counted from the denial of petitioners' First Motion for Reconsideration, not the second. Said Resolution partly reads: In this case, the petitioners alleged that they received the 19 June 2018 Order, which denied their first Motion for Reconsideration, on 2 July 2018. Following the express provision of Section 4, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, the petitioners had 60 days from 2 July 2018, or until 31 August 2018, within which to file a petition for certiorari. Instead, the petitioners filed a Manifestation and Second Motion for Reconsideration. Only upon the denial of their second Motion for Reconsideration did the petitioners initiate the certiorari proceeding. Considering that the instant Petition for Certiorari was filed only on 12 September 2018, this Court cannot give due course thereto for being filed out of time.[23] https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65992 3/13