SANOFI v. Ali Dubai
Claim Number: FA1607001682143
Complainant: SANOFI of Paris, France.
Complainant Representative:
Complainant Representative: Marchais Associes of Paris, France.
Respondent: Ali Dubai of Sharjah, Sharjah, International, AE.
Respondent Representative: Ali Dubai
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DotSite Inc.
Registrars: NameCheap, Inc.
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.
Eleni Lappa, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: July 1, 2016
Commencement: July 1, 2016
Default Date: July 18, 2016
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") .
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant is a French company with multi-national activities and is primarily engaged in the field of research& development, manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceuticals, both prescription-based an over-the counter, for a significant number of years and is quite well-known in its field. Complainant has a series of intellectual property rights on the name SANOFI, including various trademarks and its company name under which it has been conducting its business for a significant number of years.
Respondent appears to be an individual based in the United Arab Emirates with no apparent rights on the name SANOFI.
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.
1. The registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark [URS/.usRS 1.2.6.1] for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use
2. Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name [URS/.usRS 1.2.6.2]
3. [if URS] The domain name(s) was registered and is being used in bad faith [URS 1.2.6.3]
With regard to point 1: the domain name under review consists in its distinctive part of the name SANOFI which is identical to the trademark and company name rights that the Complainant validly holds and as such may easily give rise to confusion of the consuming public.
With regard to point 2: Respondent has offered no submissions concerning any rights relevant to the name SANOFI therefore he appears to have no legitimate interest on the domain name under examination <sanofi.site>
With regard to point 3: the domain name under review <sanofi.site> was registered in bad faith (as the Respondent knew or should have known of the well-known company name and trademark of the Complainant at the time of registration) and was used in bad faith as it was used for domain name parking purposes enlisting also competitor to the Complainant websites and thus creating confusion to the public disrupting the business of the Complainant.
After reviewing the Complainant’s 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 names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.
<sanofi.site>
Eleni Lappa, Examiner
Dated: July 18, 2016
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page