Republic of Philippines v. Pimentel,[note 1] 553 U.S. 851 (2008), is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which clarified the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as regards money damages sought by a foreign government, the Republic of the Philippines, via its Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG).

As early as 1986, the account of Arelma S.A. was targeted by the PCGG as being ill-gotten money of the Marcos regime.

The Pimentel class sought to compel Merrill Lynch & Co. to release the assets they held on behalf of Arelma S.A. to them.

"[6] With the support of the United States, who advocated on their behalf as an amicus curiae, they argued that state immunity (known in US law as sovereign immunity) gives them first priority in terms of recovered assets, without having to argue with members of the Pimentel class.

[10] The practical effect of the decision was a prioritizing of the Republic's claims to assets over those of human rights victims.

In Swezey v. Lynch (2012), 973 N.E.2d 703,[1] the New York Court of Appeals interpreted CPLR § 1001, which has very similar wording to the federal Rule 19, identically, ruling that while the Pimentel class has a valid federal judgment, "the judgment that they secured is against the estate of Ferdinand Marcos and it can be lawfully executed only against property that the estate legally owns."

As of January 13, 2020, the case there, known as District Attorney of New York County v. The Republic of the Philippines, is ongoing.