{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102129",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-08-20 09:49:41",
    "domain_names": [
        "boehringer-ingelheirn.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Sandra Lanczová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co.KG"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Daria Baskova)",
    "respondent": [
        "boehringer Inc"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\n-\tFORUM Case No. 1779192, The Burton Firm, P.A. v. Mena Dre (“The domain name contains the mark in its entirety, but for a misspelling of Complainant’s mark achieved by replacing the letter “m” with the combination of letters “r” and “n” to create a visually similar appearance, plus the addition of the generic Top Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com.” These alterations of the mark do not save it from the realm of confusing similarity under the standards of the Policy.”);\r\n\r\n-\tFORUM Case No. 1597465, The Hackett Group, Inc. v. Brian Herns \/ The Hackett Group (“The Panel agrees that typosquatting is occurring, and finds this is additional evidence that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).”);\r\n\r\n-\tFORUM Case No. 1785347, Morgan Stanley v. Francis Mccarthy \/ Baltec Marine Llc (“Inactive holding of a domain name does not qualify as a bona fide offering of goods or services within the meaning of Policy ¶ 4(c)(i), or a legitimate non-commercial or fair use within the meaning of Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).”);\r\n\r\n-\tCAC Case No. 101971, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co.KG v. BRIANNE HOAG (“The difference between the Complainant's trademarks and the disputed Domain Name is so thin, and the Complainant is so well-known (a pharmaceutical group of companies with roots going back to 1885, with 140 affiliated companies world-wide today and roughly 46,000 employees) that the Panel can hardly believe the the Respondent was not aware of the existence of the Complainant.”);\r\n\r\n-\tWIPO Case No. D2016-1546, BOEHRINGER Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v. Martin Hughes (“…the registration of the Domain Name which contains obvious misspelling of the Complainant’s BOEHRINGER‑INGELHEIM trademark and which is virtually identical to the Complainant’s <boehringer-ingelheim.com> domain name constitutes registration and use bad faith.”);\r\n\r\n-\tFORUM Case No. 1779192, The Burton Firm, P.A. v. Mena Dre (“”the challenged <theburtonfirrn.com> domain name is not in active use, but instead resolves to a website that lacks any content. Failure to make legitimate active use of a domain name evidences the absence of both a bona fide offering of goods or services by means of it within the ambit of Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) and a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of it within the compass of Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).”).",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceeding that is pending or decided which relates to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant established that BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM is a family-owned pharmaceutical group of companies with roots going back to 1885, when it was founded by Albert Boehringer (1861-1939) in Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of a large portfolio of trademarks containing the wording “BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM”, including the international trademark (WIPO trademark)\"BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM®\", in class 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 16, 17, 19, 29, 30 and 32, since July 2nd 1959. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of a large portfolio of domain names including the same distinctive wording “BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM”, such as <boehringer-ingelheim.com>, registered since September 1st, 1995, and <boehringeringelheim.com>, registered since July 4th, 2004. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on August 13th, 2018 and is not currently in active use.",
    "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": [
        "Carrie Shang"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-09-11 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant established that BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM is a family-owned pharmaceutical group of companies with roots going back to 1885, when it was founded by Albert Boehringer (1861-1939) in Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of a large portfolio of trademarks containing the wording “BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM”, including the international trademark (WIPO trademark)\"BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM®\", in class 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 16, 17, 19, 29, 30 and 32, since July 2nd 1959. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of a large portfolio of domain names including the same distinctive wording “BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM”, such as <boehringer-ingelheim.com>, registered since September 1st, 1995, and <boehringeringelheim.com>, registered since July 4th, 2004. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent has not submitted any evidence trying to establish its rights. ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIRN.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}