The Complainant is a pharmaceutical company established in Israel on February 13, 1944, and it was a successor to several Israeli corporations, the oldest of which was established in 1901. The Complainant is a global generic medicines producer, having a large portfolio in many therapeutic areas.<\/p>\n
The Complainant holds several trademark registrations containing and comprising “TEVA” dating back to 1975 in various countries and the domain name <tevabiosimilars.com>.<\/p>\n
On July 23, 2025; the Respondent registered the disputed domain name <tevabiosmilar.com>. The disputed domain name is currently inactive and parked.<\/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 DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME IS CONFUSINGLY SIMILAR<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademarks TEVA and TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES. The Complainant claims that its trademark “TEVA” is entirely reproduced and clearly recognizable within the disputed domain name and the addition of the term “biosmilar” does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant and its trademarks. In support of this assertion, the reference was made to the CAC UDRP decision no. 107383 concerning the domain name <tevabiosimlars.com>, where it was found that the Complainant’s trademark is clearly recognizable in the disputed domain name and the additional term could not prevent the finding of confusing similarity.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, the Complainant notes that the disputed domain name is almost identical to the Complainant’s TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES mark, and to the Complainant’s domain name <tevabiosimilars.com>. In view of this, it was claimed that this is a typical typosquatting case, as it reproduces the Complainant’s mark and domain name in their entirety but with minor alterations of letters, which do not change the overall impression that Complainant’s trademark is sufficiently recognizable within the disputed domain name. Also, the Complainant refers to the CAC UDRP decision no. 107697 involving the domain name <tevabiosmilars.com>, where the panel decided that the Complainant has provided evidence affirming that it is the registered owner of various TEVA trademarks and of a French registered trademark for TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES and that the Complainant’s registered trademark TEVA is fully incorporated in the disputed domain name, whereas the disputed domain name is, in its second level, a close typographical variant of the Complainant’s said TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES trademark.<\/p>\n
Finally, the Complainant claims that the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com” does not have the capacity to dispel confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the TEVA and TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES marks of the Complainant and highlights that gTLDs are commonly viewed as a standard registration requirement, and as such they are disregarded under the first element confusing similarity test. Consequently, it is asserted that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to marks in which the Complainant has rights and that the conditions set out in paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy are fulfilled.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
NO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTERESTS IN RESPECT OF 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
The Complainant states that the disputed domain name and the term “tevabiosmilar” have no meaning in English language. The Complainant has found nothing to suggest that the Respondent owns any identical trademarks to the disputed domain name and to the term “tevabiosmilar”. Additionally, it is claimed that there is no evidence that the Respondent has been commonly known the disputed domain name or by the term “tevabiosmilar”. Instead, the Complainant alleges that the internet search engines associate the term “tevabiosmilar” with the Complainant and its activities.<\/p>\n
The Complainant further claims that the disputed domain name is almost identical to the Complainant’s TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES trademark, and to the Complainant’s domain name <tevabiosimilars.com>, which suggests that this is a typosquatting case and refers to previous panel decisions stating that typosquatting is also an indication of a lack of rights or legitimate interests in a domain name. Moreover, the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the Complainant claims that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME WAS REGISTERED AND IS USED IN BAD FAITH<\/p>\n
The Complainant claims that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's well-known “TEVA” trademark as it reproduces the Complainant’s well-known TEVA mark in full, and almost the entirety of its TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES mark, without the consent or authorization of the Complainant. Moreover, it was claimed that a simple search in an online trademark register or in the Google search engine when the disputed domain name was registered would have informed the Respondent on the existence of the Complainant and its rights in TEVA and TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES. Given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademarks and reputation, it is claimed that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.<\/p>\n
Also, the Complainant points out that the MX Records has been set up with the disputed domain name, as ‘@tevabiosmilar.com’, and that the disputed domain name resolves to a parked page. The Complainant furthers states that the Respondent is using a privacy service to conceal its identity, and all these are indications of bad faith.<\/p>\n
Moreover, the Complainant highlighted that the disputed domain name differs from the Complainant’s domain name <tevabiosimilars.com> (under which it operates its online presence) by the deletion of two letters and as it has been held by a number of decisions under the UDRP before, typosquatting itself is evidence of relevant bad faith registration and use and indicates that the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant and its rights.<\/p>\n
On these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name <tevabiosmilar.com> in bad faith.<\/p>\n
<\/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": [ "Mrs Selma Ünlü" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-09-22 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant has submitted evidence, which the Panel accepts, showing that it is the registered owner of the “TEVA” trademarks. The Complainant’s certain “TEVA” trademarks are, inter alia, the following:<\/p>\n
- United States trademark n° 1567918 of “TEVA” (word mark), registered on November 28, 1989;<\/p>\n
- Canada trademark n° TMA517259 “TEVA” (word mark), registered on September 28, 1999;<\/p>\n
- European Union trademark n°000115394 “TEVA” (device mark), registered on April 29, 1998;<\/p>\n
- France trademark n°3706086 “TEVA BIOSIMILAIRES” (word mark), registered on September 17, 2010.<\/p>\n
Moreover, the Complainant is also the owner of the domain name <tevabiosimilars.com> registered on December 15, 2009.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "tevabiosmilar.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }