Complainant states that it “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”; that it “has become a global research-driven pharmaceutical enterprise and has around 54,500 employees”; that in 2024 it “achieved net sales of 26,796 million euros”; and that it “owns multiple domain names consisting in the wording “BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM”, such as <boehringer-ingelheim.com> registered since 1995-09-01.”<\/p>\n
The Disputed Domain Name was created on October 1, 2026. According to the Complaint, and as supported by a screenshot submitted therewith, the Disputed Domain Name is being used in connection with a “parking page.”<\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "
The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings that are pending or decided and that relate to the Disputed Domain Name.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
Complainant contends, in relevant part, as follows:<\/p>\n
Paragraph 4(a)(i): Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM Trademark because, inter alia<\/em>, “the obvious misspelling of the Complainant’s trademark BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM (i.e. the addition of the letter ‘S’) is characteristic of a typosquatting practice intended to create confusing similarity between the Complainant’s trademark and the disputed domain name.”<\/p>\n Paragraph 4(a)(ii): Complainant states that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name because, inter alia<\/em>, “Respondent is not identified in the Whois database as the disputed domain name”; “Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent”; “Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant”; “the disputed domain name is a typosquatted version of the trademark BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM”; and “the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page.”<\/p>\n Paragraph 4(a)(iii): Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith because, inter alia<\/em>, “[g]iven the distinctiveness of the Complainant’s trademark and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark”; “the misspelling of the trademark BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM was intentionally designed to be confusingly similar with the Complainant’s trademark”; “it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law”; and “MX servers are configured… which suggests that it may be actively used for email purposes.”<\/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 UDRP).<\/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 UDRP).<\/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 UDRP).<\/p>",
"procedural_factors": " The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under the UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.<\/p>",
"decision": "Accepted",
"panelists": [
"Douglas Isenberg"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2026-11-02 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " Complainant states, and provides documentation in support thereof, that it “owns a large portfolio of trademarks including the wording ‘BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM’ in several countries, such as the international trademark BOEHRINGER-INGELHEIM n°221544, registered since July 2, 1959 and duly renewed, and the international trademark BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM n°568844 registered since March 22, 1991.” These registrations are referred to herein as the “BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM Trademark.”<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"boehringersingelheim.com": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}