{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104139",
    "time_of_filling": "2021-11-08 09:16:39",
    "domain_names": [
        "boehringerequinerebates.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co.KG"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Fundacion Comercio Electronico"
    ],
    "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, founded by Albert Boehringer (1861-1939) in Ingelheim am Rhein. Ever since BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM has become a global research-driven pharmaceutical enterprise and has today about roughly 52,000 employees. The three business areas of BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM are human pharmaceuticals, animal health, and biopharmaceuticals. In 2020, net sales of the BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM group amounted to about EUR 19.6 billion.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant owns multiple domain names in the wording \"BOEHRINGER\", such as <boehringeringelheimequinerebates.com> registered and used since August 14, 2019.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <boehringerequinerebates.com> was registered on November 2, 2021, and is inactive at the date of the dispute filing.    ",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is unaware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings relating to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "COMPLAINANT\r\n\r\nI. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the protected mark\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark BOEHRINGER.\r\n\r\nIndeed, adding the terms \"EQUINE REBATES\" is not sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark BOEHRINGER. It does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark BOEHRINGER. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant and its trademark.\r\n\r\nOn the contrary, this addition worsens the likelihood of confusion, as it directly refers to the Complainant’s website <www.boehringeringelheimequinerebates.com>.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant asserts that the addition of the generic Top-Level Domain suffix \".COM\" does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the trademark BOEHRINGER. Therefore, it does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademarks, and its domain names associated.\r\n\r\nConsequently, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.\r\n\r\n\r\nII. The Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not identified as the disputed domain name in the Whois database. Past panels have held that a Respondent was not commonly known by a disputed domain name if the WHOIS information was not similar to the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests regarding the disputed domain name. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\nNeither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to use the Complainant's trademarks BOEHRINGER or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.\r\n\r\nBesides, the disputed domain name is inactive. Therefore, the Complainant contends that Respondent did not use the disputed domain name since its registration, and it confirms that Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain name. Therefore, it demonstrates a lack of legitimate interests regarding the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThus, following the preceding, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no right or legitimate interest regarding the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. The disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark BOEHRINGER.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is one of the world’s 20 leading pharmaceutical companies, with roughly 52,000 employees worldwide and 19.6 billion euros in net sales.\r\n\r\nBesides, the Complainant’s trademark BOEHRINGER is distinctive and well-known. \r\n\r\nBesides, the Complainant contends that the Respondent chose to register the disputed domain name to create confusion with the domain name <boehringeringelheimequinerebates.com>, used by the Complainant to offer rebates on equine health products.\r\n\r\nConsequently, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademarks and its reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered and used the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the disputed domain name is inactive. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity regarding the disputed domain name. Therefore, it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, an infringement of the Complainant's rights under trademark law, or an attempt to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of Respondent's website.\r\n\r\nAs prior WIPO UDRP panels have held, incorporating a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use.\r\n\r\nOn these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.\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": "The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under the Policy were met, and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Rodolfo Carlos Rivas Rea"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-12-07 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant owns various trademarks, including the word \"BOEHRINGER\" in several countries, such as the international trademark BOEHRINGER n° 799761 registered since December 2, 2002.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "BOEHRINGEREQUINEREBATES.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}