The Complainant is family-owned pharmaceutical group of companies with roots going back to 1885, when it was founded by Albert Boeringer in Ingelheim am Rhein. The Complainant employees over 54,000 employees and in 2025 its net sales amounted to 27.8 billion euros.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered on April 3, 2026 and at the time of filing of the Complaint, it resolved to a parking page displaying information regarding a closed drop-catch auction. At the time of this Decision, the disputed domain name redirects to a “for sale” page inviting interested buyers to submit offers for its purchase.<\/p>\n
The Panel undertook limited factual research into matters of public record in accordance with general powers granted to the Panel under paragraphs 10 and 12 of the Rules (WIPO Overview 3.1, section 4.8). The Panel notes that the disputed domain name had been registered by the Complainant since February 26, 2007, before apparently not being renewed in 2026. The Respondent therefore appears to have acquired the disputed domain name through a drop-catching service for expired domain names.<\/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 contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it. In particular, the Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is identical with its TRAJENTA trademark and that Top-Level-Domain suffix \".com\" does not prevent confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant's trademark. <\/p>\n
Regarding the second UDRP element, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and that it is not related to the Complainant in any way. Neither a license or authorization was granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant's TRAJENTA trademark or to apply for registration of the disputed domain name. The Respondent is also not commonly known by the disputed domain name. The Complainant further contends that the Respondent did not make any use of the disputed domain name and has no demonstrable plan to use it. According to the Complainant, this demonstrates a lack of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n
With reference to the circumstances evidencing bad faith, the Complainant states that the Respondent was most likely aware of the Complainant's TRAJENTA trademark when registering the disputed domain name. The Complainant's trademark consists of a fanciful term which is widely used by the Complainant, especially in China, where the Respondent is allegedly located. The internet search for the term \"trajenta\" displays results only in relation to the Complainant's products. Furthermore, the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page displaying information about the closed auction and therefore, the Complainant argues that it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as passing off, infringement of consumer protection legislation, or infringement of the Complainant’s trademark rights.<\/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": [ "Stefan Bojovic" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-05-21 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the owner of registered trademark for the TRAJENTA trademark. In particular, the Complainant is the owner of International trademark registration No. 935517 for TRAJENTA, registered on August 3, 2007. <\/p>\n
The Complainant also owns domain names that include its trademark TRAJENTA, such as the domain name <trajenta.co<\/span>>, registered on October 19, 2016. <\/p>", "decision_domains": { "trajenta.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }