URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
FERRING B.V v. REDACTED PRIVACY
Claim Number: FA2112001977999
DOMAIN NAME
<ferring.center>
PARTIES
Complainant: FERRING B.V of Hoofddorp, Netherlands | |
Complainant Representative: JACOBACCI AVOCATS
Olympe Vanner of Paris, France
|
Respondent: Super Privacy Service LTD c/o Dynadot of San Mateo, CA, US | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Binky Moon, LLC | |
Registrars: Dynadot, LLC |
EXAMINER
The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding. | |
Ho-Hyun Nahm, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: December 22, 2021 | |
Commencement: December 23, 2021 | |
Default Date: January 10, 2022 | |
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Findings of Fact: Complainant is part of the renowned biopharmaceutical group FERRING, founded in 1950, leader in reproductive medicine and women’s health. FERRING group owns subsidiaries operating in almost 60 countries and markets its products in 110 countries worldwide. Complainant is the owner of numerous trademark registrations FERRING all over the world (i.e 157 trademark registrations/applications). This trademark is widely used, and its reputation worldwide has been acknowledged by several UDRP Panels. |
Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant Examiner finds that Complainant holds a valid national or regional trademark registration and that is in current use. Examiner finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark FERRING. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant The Panel notes that no third party was authorized by the Complainant to register the domain name: i) the disputed domain name was registered on September 29, 2021 while Complainant has intensively and widely used its trademark for more than 70 years and has registered numerous domain names composed of FERRING; ii) Respondent never answered to the contact requests sent on behalf of Complainant, mentioning that the disputed domain name is infringing a trademark; iii) Respondent has offered for sale the disputed domain name after its registration at the price of USD 5,000 on October 2021, and now for USD 299 which are excessive out-of-pocket costs for a domain name never used before; and iv) the disputed domain name is used to redirect the Internet users to a rotating series of pages, namely pages containing doubtful contents and pages including pay-per-click contents. Therefore, Examiner determines that Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the disputed domain name.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant The Panel infers that Respondent registered the disputed domain name with actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in its mark FERRING due to Complainant’s longstanding use and reputation of the mark for more than 70 years. The Panel finds that Respondent registered the domain name for the purpose of selling it. The Panel further finds that Respondent attempts to attract Internet users likely for phishing, identity theft or malware distribution but also for commercial gain: i) the disputed domain name redirects at times to pages containing doubtful contents blocked by antivirus software; and ii) Respondent expects that the computers/devices of Internet users searching for FERRING information will be “contaminated†and data could be therefore stolen; and iii) the disputed domain name redirects at times to parking services pages displaying adds, notably for pharmaceutical products which corresponds to the products provided by Complainant’s and its core business activity: not only there is a likelihood of leading the consumers into confusion, but the Respondent may obtain “click through†revenues. FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant
has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing
evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Ho-Hyun Nahm Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page