{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102301", "time_of_filling": "2019-01-11 11:08:44", "domain_names": [ "novartis-web.com" ], "case_administrator": "Šárka Glasslová (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Novartis AG" ], "complainant_representative": "BrandIT GmbH", "respondent": [ "Feras Farhan" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "The Complainant is a global pharmaceuticals and healthcare company based in Switzerland and operating in 155 countries, with a turnover in 2017 of $49.1 billion and a history going back more than 150 years.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Respondent registered the disputed domain name on September 13, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that it has not found the Respondent to be known by the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant avers that it has no relationship with the Respondent and that the Respondent benefits from no authorization of any kind to make use of the Complainant’s trademark including applying for registration of a domain name incorporating the trademark.\r\n\r\n\r\nBy email dated November 26, 2018 to the contact email address for the Respondent contained in the WHOIS information for the disputed domain name, the Complainant sent him a cease-and-desist letter. Two reminder emails were sent to the Respondent subsequently, the last on December 12, 2018 indicating that the Complainant would initiate what is the current proceeding.", "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings pending or decided which relate to the disputed domain name.", "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\n\r\nI. LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS REQUEST\r\n\r\n\r\nIf the language of the registration agreement of the disputed domain name is a language other than English according to the applicable registrar, the Complainant hereby files a language of proceeding request that the language of the proceeding should be English based on the following facts: \r\n\r\n\r\nThe website associated with the Disputed Domain Name is operated in English;\r\n\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name includes the Complainant’s trademark “NOVARTIS” with an English word “web”. The Complainant is a global company whose business language is English and the main website operated by the Complainant is in English (see ). \r\n\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has chosen to register the disputed domain name under the Top-Level Domain name “.com” which is a commercial TLD, applicable to a broader audience than merely Jordan. A more suitable TLD if only addressing the Jordanian market would be the <.jo> extension.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe above facts show that the Respondent obviously understands English. The proceeding language should accordingly be in English.\r\n\r\n\r\nII. LEGAL GROUNDS\r\n\r\n\r\n1) The trademark “NOVARTIS” is owned by a renowned health care company operating in some 155 countries reaching around 1 billion people. In its various registrations, both word and figurative. It is thus a well-known mark worldwide, including in Jordan where the Respondent is located.\r\n\r\n\r\n2) The Respondent bears no relationship to the trademark or the Complaint. He is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and has no right or legitimate interest in it or the major part of it, that is, the “NOVARTIS” element.\r\n\r\n3) The inclusion of “NOVARTIS” in the disputed domain name makes it confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. This position has been upheld by numerous Panels, including in proceedings brought by the Complainant based on its trademark, such as WIPO case No. D2016-1688, Novartis AG v. Domain Admin, Privacy Protection Service INC d\/b\/a PrivacyProtect.org, \/ Sergei Lir regarding the domain name .\r\n\r\n\r\n4) As regards the UDRP criterion of registration and use in bad faith, the Respondent must have been aware of the Complainant’s famous mark at the time of registration. In terms of use, the website associated with the disputed domain name is a login portal which is likely phishing for internet users’ valuable data: that is, by collecting such data unlawfully and possibly for other, fraudulent purposes.\r\n\r\n\r\n5) Furthermore, the Respondent uses email , which is very likely done in order to impersonate the Complainant.\r\n\r\n\r\n6) The Complainant has not received any response from the Respondent to its cease and desist letter despite reminders. Decisions of Panels in previous proceedings have recognized such lack of response is relevant in determining the elements of lack of legitimate interest and presence bad faith under the UDRP. \r\n\r\n\r\nConsequently, the Respondent should be considered to have registered the disputed domain name which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered, well-known trademark “NOVARTIS” without any legitimate right or interest in having or using it but rather to have registered and to be using it in bad faith.\r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT: NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.", "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": [ "Kevin J. Madders" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2019-02-24 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Respondent registered the disputed domain name on September 13, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant provided lists of registrations of the trademark “NOVARTIS” to prove ownership of it worldwide, including Jordan, where the Respondent is located according to the WHOIS registration details for the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\n\r\nIt serves no useful purpose with such a famous mark to recite the various registration numbers, dates and classes. One registered in Jordan will suffice by way of example, No. 150203 for “NOVARTIS” registered on November 8, 2016 in class 42 under the Nice Classification System, a class which includes biological and chemical research activities that are core to the Complainant’s business.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe example mentioned predates the Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name by two years.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant further introduced evidence of its registration and use of the domain names and .\r\n\r\n\r\nTo substantiate further the notoriety of its brand related to the circumstances of this case, the Complainant provided evidence of its local presence in Jordan.", "decision_domains": { "NOVARTIS-WEB.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }