{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106712", "time_of_filling": "2024-07-16 12:59:49", "domain_names": [ "nexgard-brasil.shop" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM ANIMAL HEALTH FRANCE" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "João Carlos Linhares" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant belongs to the Boehringer Ingelheim group, a German pharmaceutical company, which is one of the animal healthcare global leaders. NEXGARD is a drug delivered in a beef-flavoured chew that kills adult fleas and is indicated for the treatment and prevention of flea infestations and the treatment and control of tick infestations in dogs and puppies from eight weeks of age. <\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on July 11, 2024, and points to a placeholder website provided by the Respondent's hosting provider.<\/span><\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "

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": "

COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n

The Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is <\/span>confusingly similar to the Trademark because it contains the Trademark in its entirety and the addition of the geographical term \"Brasil\" is not sufficient to avoid a finding that the domain name is confusingly similar to the mark.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant further submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. In particular, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not identified in the Whois database as the disputed domain name and is therefore is not commonly known by the disputed domain name. The Complainant further states that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way, that the Complainant does not perform any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent, and that neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Trademark, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant. The Complainant further alleges that the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page and that the Respondent has therefore not made any use of disputed domain name and lacks legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

Finally, the Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. Concerning bad faith registration, the Complainant alleges that the Trademark is well known, as confirmed by previous UDRP decisions, and that the disputed domain name refers to the Complainant's activities in Brazil. It argues that it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered and used the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark because of the distinctiveness and reputation of the Trademark. As to bad faith use, the Complainant relies on the passive holding doctrine and contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity with respect to the disputed domain name and that it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by the Respondent that would not be unlawful, such as passing off, infringement of consumer protection laws, or an infringement of the Complainant’s trademark rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>", "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).<\/p>", "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).<\/p>", "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).<\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Peter Müller" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-08-11 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the registered owner of several trademarks for \"NEXGARD\", including international trademark registration no. 1166496 \"NEXGARD\", registered since May 29, 2013 <\/span>(hereinafter referred to as the \"Trademark\").<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "nexgard-brasil.shop": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }