Paragraph 15 of the Rules states that the Panel decides a Complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy, the Rules and any rules and principles of law deemed applicable.
In the case of default by a Party, Rule 14 states that if a Party, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, does not comply with a provision of, or requirement under the Rules, the Panel shall draw such inferences therefrom as appropriate.
In the present case, the Respondent has not submitted any Response and consequently has not contested any of the contentions made by the Complainant.
The Panel proceeds therefore to decide only on the basis of the Complainant’s factual statements and the documentary evidences provided in support of them.
1.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name <boehringer-ingeheim.org> is visually and phonetically very similar with the Complainant’s registered trademarks “BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM”, given that the signs contain the majority of the same letters, have the same word structure and look alike at the first sight. Indeed, the disputed domain name appears to be a misspelled version of the registered trademarks rather than a different denomination independently selected by the Respondent.
Moreover, the gTLD “.org”, which would usually be disregarded as it is a technical requirement of registration, do not later the overall very similar impression the disputed domain name and the registered trademarks produce.
Accordingly, the Panel considers that the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s previously registered trademarks are confusingly similar and infers that paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
2. According to the Complainant’s contentions and evidences submitted within this proceeding, which were not disputed, the Respondent does not appear to be in any way related to the Complainant's business, does not act as the agent of the Complainant nor currently known and has never been known as “BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM”, or any combination of such trademark.
Furthermore, the disputed domain name <boehringer-ingeheim.org> has never been associated with any business activity and resolves currently in a webpage with no content. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent does not have any legitimate interest in the disputed domain name and rather appears to have the intention to use the disputed domain name for his own commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's trademarks.
Consequently, and in the absence of a Response, the Panel finds that the Respondent have no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, so that the requirements of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy are met.
3. Given the widespread presence of the Complainant’s trademarks and the way how the Respondent is using the disputed domain name which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks, the Panel finds that the Complainant intended to exploit the reputation of Complainant’s trademarks.
In fact, by choosing and registering the disputed domain name which represents a misspelled version of the Complainant’s well-known trademark, the Respondent is likely to be engaged in typosquatting, a practice by which a registrant of a domain name deliberately introduces slight deviations into famous marks for its commercial gain.
In other words, in the absence of sufficient evidence to the contrary and rebuttal from the Respondent, the Panel infers that by choosing to register the domain name which almost identical to Complainant’s well-known trademarks, the Respondent’s activity is indicative of registration and use of the disputed domain name in bad faith.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy.
|