{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105807",
    "time_of_filling": "2023-09-26 08:24:15",
    "domain_names": [
        "novartisstaffingonline.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Novartis AG"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "BRANDIT GmbH",
    "respondent": [
        "Will Adams (Lead Recruiting.)"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p><span>FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<br \/><br \/><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span> ABOUT COMPLAINANT:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Complainant is a pharmaceutical company based in Basel, Switzerland. The Complainant is active in the pharmaceutical business for many decades and has as group about 126 000 people of 145 nationalities work at Novartis around the world. The complainant is represented by BrandIT GmbH, Z&uuml;rich, Switzerland.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Complainant is the owner of the registered well-known trademark NOVARTIS as a word and figure mark in several classes in numerous of countries all over the world including in USA. The Complainant showed evidence that he has a presence in U.S.<\/span>, through its subsidiaries and associated companies.<\/p>\n<p><span>The Complainant owns numerous domain names composed of either its trademark NOVARTIS alone, including &lt;novartis.com&gt; (created on April 2, 1996) or in combination with other terms, e.g. &lt;novartispharma.com&gt; (created on October 27, 1999) and many others. The Complainant uses these domain names to promote the NOVARTIS mark with related products and services, here job offers. The Complainant enjoys a strong presence online also via its official social media platforms.<br \/><br \/><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>ABOUT RESPONDENT:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Respondent is an U.S. citizen, using a hidden domain holder name. On <\/span>August 31, 2023 <span>the Respondent registered Disputed Domain Name. He uses the Disputed Domain Name for staffing purposes and gaining personal data as the Complainant showed by evidence.<br \/><br \/><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>SUMMARY:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span> NOVARTIS is a well-known, distinctive trademark worldwide.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span> Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks registration predates the registration of the Disputed Domain Name.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span> Respondent has no rights in the mark NOVARTIS, bears no relationship to the Complainant, and is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name - accordingly it has no legitimate interest in the Disputed Domain Name.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span> It is highly unlikely that Respondent was not aware of Complainant&rsquo;s prior rights in the trademark NOVARTIS at the time of registering the Disputed Domain Name, given the Complainant&rsquo;s worldwide renown.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span> Respondent has used the Disputed Domain Name for a website which looks a like if it was the Complainants project.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span> Respondent failed in responding to cease-and-desist letter sent by the Complainant.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span> Respondent has been using privacy shield to conceal its identity.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span>Consequently, the Complainant argues that Respondent should be considered to have registered the Disputed Domain Name confusingly similar to the Complainant&rsquo;s well-known, distinctive trademark NOVARTIS. Especially the generic terms &ldquo;staffingonline&rdquo; in the Disputed Domain Name in combination with the well-known word part &ldquo;Novartis&rdquo; make obvious that the Respondent was aware what he has done. The Complainant has not found that the Respondent is of any legitimate right or interest in using the Disputed Domain Name, but rather registered and has been using the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>From the Complainant&rsquo;s perspective, the Respondent deliberately chose to incorporate a sign that is confusingly similar to the well-known, distinctive trademark NOVARTIS in the Disputed Domain Name, very likely with the intention to attract U.S. and other job seekers by benefiting from the Complainant&rsquo;s worldwide renown.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>It should be highlighted that most of Complainant&rsquo;s trademark registrations predate the registration of the Disputed Domain Name and the Respondent has never been authorized by the Complainant to register the Disputed Domain Name. Considering the renown of the Complainant and its trademark NOVARTIS, and the overall composition of the Disputed Domain Name, i.e. incorporates the Complainant&rsquo;s well-known, distinctive trademark NOVARTIS in its entirety along with the terms &ldquo;pharma&rdquo; and &ldquo;services&rdquo;, which are closely related to the Complainant and its business activities, 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&rsquo;s rights and reputation.<\/span><\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the Disputed Domain Name.<\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p>No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>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).<\/p>",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "<p>The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Dsputed Domain Name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).<\/p>",
    "bad_faith": "<p>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).<\/p>",
    "procedural_factors": "<p>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.<\/p>",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Harald von Herget"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-11-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p><span>The Complainant is Owner of trademarks in U.S. and all over the world. E.g. he has following valid trademarks with the name NOVARTIS:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Trademark: NOVARTIS<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Swiss Reg. No: <\/span>2P-427370<\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. Date: <\/span>July 1, 1996, in classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 20, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 40 and 42<\/p>\n<p><span>&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>International trademark registration for NOVARTIS<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. No. 663765<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. date: July 1, 1996<\/span> in classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 20, 22, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 40 and 42<\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. No.: 1249666<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. date: April 28, 2015 in classes 01, 03, 05, 09, 10, 16, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 40, 41, 42, 44 and countries GE-IN-OA-PH-RW<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>US trademark registration for NOVARTIS (USPTO)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. No.: 2336960<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Reg. date: April 4, 2000<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Complainant also provided evidence that it owns a domain name containing the name &lt;novartis.com&gt;, registered on April 2, 1996, <\/span>or in combination with other terms, such as &lt;novartispharma.com&gt; (registered in 1999) <span>well before the Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name, which was registered on August 31, 2023.<\/span><\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "novartisstaffingonline.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}