{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101250",
    "time_of_filling": "2016-08-01 09:38:16",
    "domain_names": [
        "pradaxa.xyz"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Nikola Balaš (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Laurent Becker)",
    "respondent": [
        "Huang ChaoQiong"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is a family-owned pharmaceutical group of companies with roots going back to 1885. The Complainant has become a global research-driven pharmaceutical enterprise and has today about 140 affiliated companies world-wide with roughly 46,000 employees. The two main business areas of the Complainant are: Human Pharmaceuticals and Animal Health. In 2013, net sales of the Complainant’s group of companies amounted to about EUR 14.1 billion. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant uses the trademark \"PRADAXA\" in the pharmaceutical sector and more specifically for an oral anticoagulant from the class of the direct thrombin inhibitors.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant assumes that the disputed domain name is identical to its registered trademark \"PRADAXA\" as the disputed domain name contains the Complainant's trademark in its entirety. The mere addition of the suffix \".xyz\" does not alter the overall impression of a clear connection between <pradaxa.xyz> and the Complainant's trademark. \r\n\r\nFurthermore, in the Complainant's view, the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interest in the domain name in dispute.  \r\nActually, according to the Complainant's statement, the Respondent is not related in any way with the Complainant and the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent, neither licence nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complianant's trademark \"PRADAXA\", or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.  In addition, the Complainant underlines that the website related to <pradaxa.xyz> merely displays a blank page and therefore the Respondent has made no use of the disputed domain name to date and he has not provided any evidence to support that he intends to make a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the domain name in dispute.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also contends that given the fame of the Complainant's trademark and the fact that \"PRADAXA\" has no dictionary meaning, except as referring to the Complainant's trademark, the insertion of \"PRADAXA\" in the disputed domain name gives rise to the inference that the Respondent ought to have registered the disputed domain name for its trademark value.  In addition, the Complainant notes that when the Respondent registered <pradaxa.xyz> he was necessarily advised of the registered trademark \"PRADAXA\" by Trademark Clearing House (TMCH). This in consideration of the fact that the trademark \"PRADAXA\" is registered in the TMCH since April 16, 2014 and therefore when the Respondent registered the domain name in dispute, on June 30, 2016, he was advised of the existance of the Complainant's trademark.  Finally the Complainant argues that the website in relation with the disputed domain names <pradaxa.xyz> only display a blank page (passive holding).\r\n\r\n In the Complainant's view the awareness of the Respondent regarding the trademark \"PRADAXA\" at the time of the disputed domain name registration and the passive holding of the domain name by the Respondent can evidence bad faith in registering and using the domain name <pradaxa.xyz>.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings relating to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\n",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i)of the Policy).",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii)of the Policy).",
    "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy).",
    "procedural_factors": "The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Avv. Guido Maffei"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2016-09-09 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of different trademark and domain name registrations. In particular Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. Kg owns:\r\n\r\n- International Registration for \"PRADAXA\" no. 807503 registered on July 9, 2003 for class 5 with designation in multiple countries;\r\n\r\n- International Registration for \"PRADAXA\" no. 991238 registered on October 29, 2008 for class 5 with designation in multiple countries ;\r\n\r\n- domain name <pradaxa.biz> registered on November 23, 2006;\r\n\r\n- domain name <pradaxa.com> registered on March 7, 2003;\r\n\r\n- domain name <pradaxa.net> registered on November 23, 2006;\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on June 30, 2016.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "PRADAXA.XYZ": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}