{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101836",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-01-11 09:02:07",
    "domain_names": [
        "tevalpharm.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "RiskIQ, Inc c\/o Jonathan Matkowsky",
    "respondent": [
        "aaa enterprise "
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is a global pharmaceutical company, committed to increasing access to high-quality healthcare by developing, producing and marketing affordable generic medicines and a focused portfolio of specialty medicines. \r\n\r\nIt operates in pharmaceutical markets worldwide, with a significant presence in the United States, Europe and other markets. Complainant is the leading generic drug company in the U.S., the leading generic pharmaceutical company in Europe, and in Canada in terms of prescriptions and sales. Revenues of Complainant in 2016 were $21.9 billion. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of several domain names and trademarks containing the words \"“TEVA\" and \"TEVAPHARM\".\r\n\r\nThe Disputed domain name has been registered on December 27, 2017, and resolves to a parked page displaying commercial ads.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the Disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the TEVA and TEVAPHARM trademarks in which Complainant has rights within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. It incorporates the trademark “TEVA” followed by the letter \"l\" and the term “pharm,” which is applicable as a descriptive term to the field in which the Complainant plays a prominent role, i.e. the pharmaceutical sector, and which is therefore likely to increase the possibility of confusion amongst consumers. In addition, the Complainant is also the owner of a further registered trademark “TEVAPHARM” and the Disputed domain name incorporates the entirety, adding only the letter \"l\" in between \"Teva\" and \"Pharm,\" which looks like a vertical line separating the two words, or at best, is a typographical error, which does not negate confusing similarity.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states furthermore, that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed domain name, because Respondent does not use it in connection with any legitimate use, but for a parking page. Respondent furthermore set up a mail server on the Disputed domain name, which is - in the view of Complainant - no legitimate interest. \r\n\r\nFinally, the Disputed domain name was - in the view of the Complainant - registered and is being used in bad faith, because it is inconceivable that Respondent was unaware of Complainant's rights in either\/both TEVA and TEVAPHARM when the domain was registered and because of the use of automatically generated pay-per-click links on the website and the setup of a mail server on the Disputed domain name.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate 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": "At the time of the commencement of this administrative proceeding, the publically available WhoIs details for the Disputed domain name recorded WhoisGuard, Inc. as respondent. In response to the CAC’s Registrar Verification Request, the Registrar identified the underlying respondent as “aaa enterprise\". Complainant therefore amended the Complaint with this Respondent.\r\n\r\nThe Panel is, after the Complaint was amended, 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": [
        "Jan Christian Schnedler, LL.M."
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-02-13 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "According to the evidence provided, the Complainant owns a portfolio of trademarks including the wording “TEVA”  and \"TEVAPHARM\" in several countries, e.g. as follows:\r\n\r\nIn China in word characters since 1993, in Class 5 (Reg. No. 644291). \r\nIn the United States, Complainant's mark TEVA has been registered since 1989 in Class 5 (US. Reg. No. 1,567,918) . \r\nIn Europe, the mark TEVA has been registered in Class 5 since 2000 (EUIPO Reg. No 001192830). \r\nIn Canada, TEVA has been registered in Class 5 since 1993 (Trademark Reg No. TMA411063).\r\nIn Israel, TEVA , in Class 5 since 1975 (No. 41075).\r\nIn Danemark the mark TEVAPHARM in Class 5 since 2011 (VR 2011 02130).\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant owns domain names consisting in the wording “TEVAPHARM”, such as <tevapharm.com>.\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "TEVALPHARM.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}