FACTS PROVIDED BY THE COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant is a German 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. The Complainant <\/span>has become a global research-driven pharmaceutical enterprise and has around 53,500 employees. It is divided into two business areas: Human Pharma and Animal Health. In 2023, the Complainant achieved net sales of 25.6 billion euros.<\/p>\n The Complainant indicated that JARDIANCE (Empagliflozin) is a prescription medicine used along with diet and exercise to lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes as well as to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death in adults with type 2 diabetes who have known cardiovascular disease.<\/p>\n The Complainant owns a portfolio of brands including the word “JARDIANCE” in several countries, such as the international trademark JARDIANCE n° 981336 registered since September 3, 2008. Furthermore, the Complainant is the owner of a numerous portfolio of domain names including the wording “JARDIANCE”, such as the domain name <jardiance.com> registered on April 30, 2008.<\/p>\n The disputed domain name <jardiance-generic.cfd> (hereinafter, the “Disputed Domain Name”) was registered on April 16, 2025 and it resolves to a parking page with commercial links. <\/p>\n According to the Complainant’s non-contested allegations, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the Disputed Domain Name, and he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.<\/p>\n For the purpose of this case, the Registrar confirmed that the language of the registration agreement is English.<\/p>\n The Respondent did not reply to the Complaint. <\/p>\n NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/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 First element: Similarity<\/p>\n The Complainant confirms that the Disputed Domain Name <jardiance-generic.cfd> is confusingly similar to its trademark JARDIANCE.<\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the addition of the term “GENERIC” is not sufficient to escape the finding that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the trademark and branded goods JARDIANCE. It does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark JARDIANCE. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant, its trademark and the domain name associated.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the Complainant contends that the addition of the new gTLD “.CFD” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant, its trademark and its domain names associated.<\/p>\n Second element: Rights or legitimate interest<\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not identified in the Whois as the Disputed Domain Name. In accordance with the Complainant, Past panels have held that a Respondent was not commonly known by a Disputed Domain Dame if the Whois information was not similar to the Disputed Domain Name. Thus, the Respondent is not known as the Disputed Domain Name.<\/p>\n The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name and he is not related in any way with the Complainant. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.<\/p>\n Neither licence nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark JARDIANCE, or apply for registration of the Disputed Domain Name by the Complainant.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the Disputed Domain Name resolves to a parking page with commercial links. In accordance with the Complainant’s allegation, past panels have found it is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate non-commercial or fair use.<\/p>\n Third element: Bad faith<\/p>\n 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>\n Moreover, the Disputed Domain Name resolves to a parking page with commercial links. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has attempt to attract Internet users for commercial gain to his own website thanks to the Complainant’s trademarks for its own commercial gain, which is an evidence of bad faith.<\/p>\n Finally, the Complainant states that the Respondent is known for a such pattern of conduct and provided with the WIPO Case No. D2025-0271 LPL Financial LLC v. Clark Smith where the Respondent’s name appears as well as Respondent.<\/p>\n RESPONDENT: <\/p>\n Respondent did not reply to the Complaint.<\/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": [
"Victor Garcia Padilla"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2025-06-09 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant is the owner of several trademarks JARDIANCE, including but not limited to the international trademark JARDIANCE n° 981336 registered since September 3, 2008.<\/p>\n The Complainant also owns many domain names including its trademark JARDIANCE, such as the domain name <jardiance.com> registered on April 30, 2008.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"jardiance-generic.cfd": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}