The Complainant is a subsidiary of Nestlé S.A., the main operating company in the Nestlé Group founded by Henri Nestlé in 1866. The Complainant owns the majority of the trademarks held by the Nestlé Group. The Nestlé Group is active in the sale of food products and related services worldwide. The Nestlé Group markets its products in 190 countries, has about 275,000 employees worldwide, and has a physical presence in 80 countries. The Nestlé Group is the largest publicly traded food and nutritional products company in the world. The Complainant’s group offers a broad range of products, including dietary supplements under several brands. In 2017, the Complainant acquired Pure Encapsulations, a brand that focuses on high-quality, hypoallergenic supplements. In 2012, Pure Encapsulations launched the \"Integrative Mental Health Series,\" a product line that includes the product NeuroPure. NeuroPure is formulated to support serotonin and dopamine production and has been marketed continuously in the United States since its introduction.<\/p>\n
The Complainant points out that the Respondent is a natural person located in Thailand. The Complainant states that it does not know the Complainant. The Complainant notes that the disputed domain name is, at the time of filing, being used to direct internet users to a website selling supplements directly competing with the Complainant's products. The Complainant notes that the products promoted through the disputed domain name are the same that were sold in the context of a previous successful UDRP procedure concerning a domain name similar to the disputed domain name. <\/p>\n
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark \"NEUROPURE”, because it consists of the above-mentioned trademark with the addition of the generic term \"pro\". The Complainant considers that the addition of a generic term does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity.<\/p>\n
The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name for the following reasons:<\/p>\n
- the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name;<\/p>\n
- the domain is being used to promote a line of neurological supplements in competition with the Complainant's ones.
The Complainant points out that even if the disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent in September 2023, before the Complainant's U.S. federal trademark registration was issued, the Complainant had valid unregistered rights in the United States at the time of the disputed domain name registration. The Complainant underlines that the Complainant's NEUROPURE brand began to be marketed in 2012, with yearly sales demonstrating consistent growth between 2012 and 2023.
The Complainant argues that, on the balance of probabilities, it is highly unlikely that the Respondent was not aware of the Complainant's prior rights when he registered the disputed domain name, because the Respondent uses the disputed domain name to market neurological supplements, which is exactly the market sector in which the Complainant's prior rights were established. The Complainant adds that, even if the Respondent was not aware of the Complainant's rights, the Complainant submits that a simple search by using Internet search engines would have alerted the Respondent to the existence of the Complainant's NEUROPURE product.
The Complainant considers that the disputed domain name has also been used in bad faith because it is being used to display a commercial website selling neurological supplement products in direct competition with those of the Complainant. <\/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": "
The Complainant, relying on the arguments summarised above, contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.
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": [ "Michele Antonini (Presiding Panelist)" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-12-14 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the registrant of the U.S. trademark registration No. 7790279, “NEUROPURE”, registered on May 13, 2025 , for goods and services in class 5.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent on September 7, 2023.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"neuropurepro.com": "TRANSFERRED"
}
}