{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103732", "time_of_filling": "2021-04-09 00:00:00", "domain_names": [ "Novartiswebinar.org" ], "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Novartis AG" ], "complainant_representative": "BRANDIT GmbH", "respondent": [ "John Elsawaf" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nI. LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS REQUEST:\r\n\r\nTo the best of Complainant’s knowledge, the language of the Registration Agreement of the disputed domain name is English according to the Registrar Verification. Therefore, the language of the proceedings should be English.\r\n\r\n\r\nII. ABOUT COMPLAINANT AND THE BRAND NOVARTIS\r\n\r\nThe Novartis Group is one of the most prominent global pharmaceutical and healthcare groups. It provides solutions to address the evolving needs of patients worldwide by developing and delivering innovative medical treatments and drugs. Novartis AG (the \"Complainant\"), created in 1996 through a merger of two other companies Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz, is the holding company of the Novartis Group.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant's products are manufactured and sold in many regions worldwide. The Complainant has a strong presence in Egypt, where the Respondent is located. Having its presence for more than 50 years in Egypt, the Complainant has numerous subsidiaries and associated companies. Novartis Egypt is also the largest pharmaceuticals producer in the country, active in organizing events and campaigns to address health issues and social issues.\r\nMoreover, previous UDRP Panels have stated that the NOVARTIS trademark is well-known.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns numerous domain names composed of either its trademark NOVARTIS alone, including (created on April 19, 2002) and (created on April 2, 1996) or in combination with other terms, e.g., (created on October 27, 1999). The Complainant uses these domain names to promote the NOVARTIS mark with related products and services.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant enjoys a strong presence online, also via its official website and via its official social media platforms. Moreover, on both its general official website and the local official website for Egypt, the Complainant had already organized many webinars, the information of which is publicly available.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on March 7, 2021.", "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": "COMPLAINANT\r\n\r\nA. THE DOMAIN NAME IS IDENTICAL OR CONFUSINGLY SIMILAR\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name, which was registered on March 7, 2021, according to the WHOIS. It incorporates the Complainant's well-known, distinctive trademark NOVARTIS in its entirety and the generic term \"webinar\", which is closely related to the Complainant and its business activities. Therefore, could lead consumers to assume that the disputed domain name is an official website of the Complainant. The addition of the gTLD \".org\" does not add any distinctiveness to the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\nThe same reasoning should apply in the current case, and the disputed domain name should be considered confusingly similar to the trademark NOVARTIS.\r\n\r\nB. RESPONDENT HAS NO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTEREST IN RESPECT OF THE DOMAIN NAME\r\n\r\nThe Complainant and the Respondent have never had any previous relationships, nor has the Complainant ever granted the Respondent any rights to use the NOVARTIS trademark in any form, including the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has not found that the Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name or has legitimate interest over the disputed domain name. When searched for \"Novartiswebinar\" in the Google search engine, the returned results all pointed to the Complainant and its business activities.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent could have easily performed a similar search before registering the disputed domain name and quickly learned that the Complainant owns the trademarks. The Complainant has been using its trademarks in Egypt Respondent resides and many other countries worldwide. However, the Respondent still chose to register the disputed domain name as such.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, according to the Registrar Verification, the Respondent is an individual named \"John Elsawaf\", which is not related to the term \"Novartis\" or the Complainant in any form.\r\n\r\nBy the time the Complainant prepared this amended Complaint on April 15, 2021, the disputed domain name did not resolve to any active website.\r\n\r\nFrom the Complainant's perspective, the Respondent deliberately chose to use the well-known, distinctive trademark NOVARTIS as the body of the disputed domain name, very likely with the intention to benefit from the Complainant's worldwide renown and to confuse Internet users as to the source or sponsorship and therefore cannot be considered as a bona fide offering of goods or services.\r\n\r\nFor the preceding reasons, it shall be concluded that the Respondent has no right nor legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nC. THE DOMAIN NAME WAS REGISTERED AND IS BEING USED IN BAD FAITH\r\n\r\ni. THE DOMAIN NAME WAS REGISTERED IN BAD FAITH\r\n\r\nIt should be highlighted that most of the Complainant's trademark registrations predate the registration of the disputed domain name, and the Complainant has never authorized the Respondent to register the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\nConsidering the renown of the Complainant and its trademark NOVARTIS, and the overall composition of the disputed domain name, i.e., using the term \"Novartis\" in connection with the word \"webinar\", it follows that incorporating the well-known trademark NOVARTIS in the disputed domain name is a deliberate and calculated attempt to improperly benefit from the Complainant's rights and reputation.\r\n\r\nAdditionally, because:\r\n• The Respondent very likely knew about the Complainant and its trademark;\r\n• The Complainant's trademark NOVARTIS is a distinctive, well-known trademark worldwide and in Egypt where the Respondent resides;\r\n• The Respondent has failed in presenting a credible evidence-backed rationale for registering the disputed domain name\r\nthe disputed domain name shall be deemed as registered in bad faith.\r\n\r\nii. THE DOMAIN NAME IS BEING USED IN BAD FAITH\r\n\r\nFirstly, as noted in the previous paragraphs, the disputed domain name did not resolve any active website.\r\n\r\nSecondly, the Complainant has tried to reach the Respondent by a cease-and-desist notice sent on March 15, 2021, through the emails provided in the WHOIS, as the registrant was under privacy shield. However, until the Complainant prepared this amended Complaint, it has not received any response from the Respondent.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent's non-response to the cease-and-desist letter infers bad faith use of the disputed domain name.\r\nThirdly, the Respondent has been using a privacy shield to conceal its identity.\r\n\r\nConsequently, the Respondent should be considered to have registered the disputed domain name confusingly similar to the Complainant's well-known, distinctive trademark NOVARTIS. The Complainant has not found that the Respondent is of any legitimate right or interest in using the disputed domain name, but instead registered and has been using the disputed domain name in bad faith.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT\r\n\r\nNo administratively compliant Response has been filed.", "rights": "To the satisfaction of the Panel, the Complainant has shown that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).", "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "To the satisfaction of the Panel, the Complainant has 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": "To the satisfaction of the Panel, the Complainant has 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": "Before moving on to the dispute's substance, the Panel must weigh in on a procedural matter. The Complainant has requested the language of proceedings to be English. It has been confirmed that the language of the registration agreement of the disputed domain name is English. It is worth noting that paragraph 10 of the UDRP Rules vests Panels with authority to conduct the proceedings in a manner it considers appropriate while simultaneously ensuring both parties are treated equally. Following the registration agreement, the Panels confirms English as the language of proceedings.\r\n\r\nThe 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. \r\n", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Rodolfo Carlos Rivas Rea" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-05-10 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of the well-known trademark NOVARTIS registered as a word and device mark in several classes worldwide, including Egypt. The vast majority of the Complainant's trademark registrations predates the registration of the disputed domain name. Namely, the Complainant's trademark registrations in Egypt applying to the present proceedings include the following earlier rights:\r\n\r\nTrademark: NOVARTIS\r\nReg. no: 663765\r\nReg. date: July 1, 1996\r\n\r\nTrademark: NOVARTIS\r\nReg. no: 666218\r\nReg. date: October 31, 1996", "decision_domains": { "NOVARTISWEBINAR.ORG": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }