{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108422", "time_of_filling": "2026-02-20 09:54:08", "domain_names": [ "infonovartisdr.space" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Novartis AG" ], "complainant_representative": "Abion GmbH", "respondent": [ "Drizzly DC " ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is the holding company of the Novartis Group, created through the merger of the companies Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz. In 2024, the Novartis Group<\/span> employed 75 883 full‑time equivalent employees, and achieved net sales of USD 50.3 billion and total net income of USD 11.9 billion.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant operates its official website at the domain name <novartis.com>, registered since 2 April 1996.<\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on December 8, 2025. It is currently inactive.<\/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 submits that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the NOVARTIS trademark, because it incorporates this trademark in its entirety in combination with terms “info” and “dr”, which are commonly-used abbreviations for “information” and “doctor”. According to the Complainant, the addition of the elements “info” and “dr” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity to the NOVARTIS trademark. The Complainant adds that the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) extension “.space” in the disputed domain name is a standard registration requirement and may be disregarded when assessing whether it is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.<\/p>\n

The Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, because the Complainant has never authorised it to use the NOVARTIS trademark, including in a domain name. The Complainant notes that there is no evidence that the Respondent is known by the dispute domain name or owns any corresponding registered trademarks. The Complainant points out that, when conducting searches on online trademark databases regarding the terms “infonovartisdr.space”, “infonovartisdr” or “info novartis dr”, no information is found in relation with trademarks corresponding to the aforementioned terms. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant maintains that the Respondent has not been using, or preparing to use, the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services, nor making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

The Complainant notes that the structure of the disputed domain name reveals that the Respondent’s intention in registering it was to refer to the Complainant, its trademark and business activity and to create an association, and a subsequent likelihood of confusion, with the Complainant and its NOVARTIS trademark in Internet users’ minds. In the Complainant’s view, the words “info” and “dr”, read together with the NOVARTIS trademark, may give the false impression that the disputed domain name resolves to a website providing information about the Novartis group’s activities to an audience of doctors, or given by doctors, and Internet users may wrongly believe that it is directly connected or authorised by the Complainant and would resolve to the Complainant’s official website. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant notes that the disputed domain name does not currently resolve to an active webpage, and that on 8 December 2025 and 8 January 2026, it resolved to a parking page. The Complainant concludes that the disputed domain name is being passively held, and there is no evidence that the Respondent has been using, or preparing to use, the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or has made a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant adds that on 8 January 2026, it sent a cease-and-desist letter to the registrant of the disputed domain name and reminders on 16 and 21 January 2026, but there was no response. According to the Complainant, this, coupled with the absence of use of the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services, further demonstrates the Respondent’s absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. It notes that the NOVARTIS trademark significantly predates the registration of the disputed domain name and the Respondent has never been authorised by the Complainant to register the disputed domain name. The Complainant notes that the Novartis group has a strong presence online, and is very active online via its official website and on social networks to promote its trademark, products and services. The Complainant states that Novartis group has also an active business presence in Nigeria, where the Respondent is based. According to the Complainant, by conducting a simple search online on popular search engines regarding the terms “Novartis” alone or in association with the terms “info” and “dr”, the Respondent would have inevitably learnt about the Complainant, its trademark and business. In the Complainant’s view, it is inconceivable that the Respondent was unaware of the existence of the Complainant when it registered the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

The Complainant claims that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with knowledge of the Complainant and the NOVARTIS trademark and to take advantage of the same. The Complainant notes that previous UDRP Panels have held, under the doctrine of passive holding, that “the non-use of a domain would not prevent a finding of bad faith, as discussed in section 3.3 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Select UDRP Questions (“WIPO Overview 3.1”).<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n

The Respondent did not submit a Response in this proceeding.<\/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": [ "Assen Alexiev" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-03-26 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the owner of various trademark registrations for NOVARTIS (the “NOVARTIS<\/span> trademark”), including the following representative registrations:<\/p>\n

− the International trademark NOVARTIS with registration No. 663765, registered on 1 July 1996 for goods and services in International Classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 20, 22, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 40 and 42; <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

− the United States trademark NOVARTIS with registration No. 2336960, registered on 4 April 2000 for goods in International Class 5; and<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

− the European Union trademark NOVARTIS with registration No. 013393641, registered on 17 March 2015 for goods in International Classes 9 and 10.<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "infonovartisdr.space": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }