Cialis® Tablets for Erectile Dysfunction

On October 10, 2016, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Bruce E. Meyerson as Panelist.

Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from the Respondents to Complainant. Complainant has registered the CIALIS trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (�USPTO�) (Reg. The mark is used in connection with the sale of pharmaceutical and medical treatment for sexual dysfunction.

Best Prices on Generic Cialis

On October 10, 2016, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Bruce E. Meyerson as Panelist. Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from the Respondents to Complainant. Complainant has registered the CIALIS trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (�USPTO�) (Reg. The mark is used in connection with the sale of pharmaceutical and medical treatment for sexual dysfunction.

POINT VALUE

Respondents� domain names are confusingly similar to the CIALIS mark through the incorporation of the mark fully, with the addition of generic/descriptive words like �buy,� �cheap,� and �generic,� geographic terms �Canada� or �Canadian,� along with generic top-level domains (�gTLDs�) �.com,� �.org,� or �.net.� Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the domain names.� No evidence exists that Respondents are commonly known by the term CIALIS or any of the domain names. Further, all the active websites associated with the domain names resolve to the same online pharmacy, which promotes and allegedly sells �generic� versions of CIALIS brand product, not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (�FDA�). The attempted sale of counterfeit pharmaceutical products does not represent a bona fide offering of goods or services or any legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Respondents registered and use the domain names in bad faith.

Select your dosage

First, Respondents have engaged in a pattern of bad faith registration and use through their registration of over 430 domains in the current proceeding. Second, Respondents� use of the domains to promote products that compete with Complainant�s business is disruptive. Third, Respondents� use of the domains to sell competing products constitutes bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy � 4(b)(iv). Fourth, Respondents� use of the domains is potentially harmful to the health of many unsuspecting consumers who may purchase unlawfully sold pharmaceutical products promoted through Respondents� resolving websites. Finally, based on Complainant�s well-known CIALIS trademark, Respondents must have registered the domains with actual or at least canadian cialis 5mg constructive knowledge of Complainant�s mark and its rights therein. Respondents� domain names are confusingly similar to the CIALIS mark through the incorporation of the mark fully, with the addition of generic/descriptive words like �buy,� �cheap,� and �generic,� geographic terms �Canada� or �Canadian,� along with generic top-level domains (�gTLDs�) �.com,� �.org,� or �.net.� Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the domain names.� No evidence exists that Respondents are commonly known by the term CIALIS or any of the domain names. Further, all the active websites associated with the domain names resolve to the same online pharmacy, which promotes and allegedly sells �generic� versions of CIALIS brand product, not approved by the U.S.

• Guide to ordering Canada tablets online safely and securely.
• Top online pharmacies to buy Cialis from Canada-based suppliers.
• Understanding Canadian regulations on purchasing Cialis online.
• How to verify the legitimacy of online Canada pharmacies.
• Benefits of buying Cialis tablets from Canada online stores.
• Comparing prices of Cialis in Canada versus other countries.
• Step-by-step process to place an order for Canada Cialis tablets.
• Tips for discreet shipping when ordering Cialis online from Canada.

Food and Drug Administration (�FDA�).

The attempted sale of counterfeit pharmaceutical products does not represent a bona fide offering of goods or services or any legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Respondents registered and use the domain names in bad faith. First, Respondents have engaged in a pattern of bad faith registration and use through their registration of over 430 domains in the current proceeding. Second, Respondents� use of the domains to promote products that compete with Complainant�s business is disruptive. Third, Respondents� use of the domains to sell competing products constitutes bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy � 4(b)(iv). Fourth, Respondents� use of the domains is potentially harmful to the health of many unsuspecting consumers who may purchase unlawfully sold pharmaceutical products promoted through Respondents� resolving websites.

Finally, based on Complainant�s well-known CIALIS trademark, Respondents must have registered the domains with actual or at least canadian cialis 5mg constructive knowledge of Complainant�s mark and its rights therein. There are over 400 domain names at issue in this proceeding and over 100 respondents of which only one has submitted a Response to the Complaint. Respondent Dr. Adam Joo has informed the Forum he consents to the transfer of the , , and domain names.� Based on the evidence, the remaining Respondents are part of the PharmEmpire, a network that advertises and sells generic versions of Complainant�s CIALIS brand product.� These Respondents are listed in Annex 2 to the Complainant and their identities are part of the record in this proceeding.

• How Canadian pharmacies ensure medication authenticity.
• Comparing online Cialis prices with retail outlets in Canada.
• The role of doctors in online Cialis prescription process.
• Common misconceptions about buying Cialis online.
• How online ordering supports discreet healthcare needs.
• Understanding pill identification codes for Cialis tablets.
• Tips for keeping track of your online Cialis order.
• How online pharmacies handle canceled or failed transactions.

Complainant holds trademark rights for the CIALIS mark.� Respondents� domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant�s CIALIS mark.� Complainant has established that Respondents lack rights or legitimate interests in the use of the domain names described herein and that the Respondents, with exception of Dr.

Storage and Travel Basics

There are over 400 domain names at issue in this proceeding and over 100 respondents of which only one has submitted a Response to the Complaint. Respondent Dr. Adam Joo has informed the Forum he consents to the transfer of the , , and domain names.� Based on the evidence, the remaining Respondents are part of the PharmEmpire, a network that advertises and sells generic versions of Complainant�s CIALIS brand product.� These Respondents are listed in Annex 2 to the Complainant and their identities are part of the record in this proceeding. Complainant holds trademark rights for the CIALIS mark.� Respondents� domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant�s CIALIS mark.� Complainant has established that Respondents lack rights or legitimate interests in the use of the domain names described herein and that the Respondents, with exception of Dr. Adam Joo, registered and use the domain names in bad faith.

Product Details

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable." Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and (2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. In this proceeding, Complainant has alleged the entities which control the domain names at issue are effectively controlled by the same person and/or entity, which is operating under several aliases.� Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the �Rules�) provides that a �complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder.� Complainant has set forth the following 20 cialis information in support of its argument that all of the domain names at issue in this proceeding are under common control: According to LegitScript, a company providing assistance with this proceeding, the Domain Names have been identified as under control of single criminal enterprise.� The active websites associated with the Domain Names are part of the PharmEmpire network that advertises and sells generic versions of Complainant�s CIALIS brand product.� Further, all of the websites associated with the Domain Names use the same template on the landing pages and redirect customers to trustedpharmacy24.com once a product is selected.� �Additionally, all of the websites associated with the Domain Names use the dedicated payment portal secure-bill.net to collect payment information from users. In each case, the Domain Names were registered using the contact information for a US-based medical practitioner or practice and it is likely that the Domain Names have been registered without the knowledge or consent of the individuals named in the Whois records. Moreover, the Domain Names were registered at both Nanjing Imperious Technology, Co. Ltd., and Vautron Rechenzentrum AG using the same identities on the same dates.� For example, on May 2, 2016, Domain Names were registered at both registrars using the names Marian Garcia, Evan Swanson, Bridgette Latimer, and Alison Stocks.� Other commonalities include, of course, that the Domain Names contain the CIALIS trademark and all of the Domain Names were registered in 2015 and 2016.

Privacy and Convenience

(citations to the record omitted).� Based on the foregoing uncontradicted evidence in the record, the Panel concludes the Complainant has established that the all of the domain names described in this proceeding are under common control within the meaning of Paragraph 3(c).� One exception concerns Respondent Dr. Adam Joo, which is discussed below. Preliminary Issue B: Consent to Transfer / Identity Theft One of the many Respondents, Dr. Adam Joo, has submitted a formal Response stating he has not registered or authorized registration of the , , and domain names.� Respondent Joo has stated he �does not object to transfer or cancellation of the domain names and is willing to execute a transfer agreement of said domain names.�� Implicit in his Response is a claim of stolen identity as he disclaims any knowledge of the registration of the foregoing domains. After the initiation of this proceeding, Nanjing Imperiosus Technology Co. Adam Joo, registered and use the domain names in bad faith. Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable." Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and (2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Real people, real results, real treatment.

In this proceeding, Complainant has alleged the entities which control the domain names at issue are effectively controlled by the same person and/or entity, which is operating under several aliases.� Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the �Rules�) provides that a �complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder.� Complainant has set forth the following 20 cialis information in support of its argument that all of the domain names at issue in this proceeding are under common control: According to LegitScript, a company providing assistance with this proceeding, the Domain Names have been identified as under control of single criminal enterprise.� The active websites associated with the Domain Names are part of the PharmEmpire network that advertises and sells generic versions of Complainant�s CIALIS brand product.� Further, all of the websites associated with the Domain Names use the same template on the landing pages and redirect customers to trustedpharmacy24.com once a product is selected.� �Additionally, all of the websites associated with the Domain Names use the dedicated payment portal secure-bill.net to collect payment information from users. In each case, the Domain Names were registered using the contact information for a US-based medical practitioner or practice and it is likely that the Domain Names have been registered without the knowledge or consent of the individuals named in the Whois records. Moreover, the Domain Names were registered at both Nanjing Imperious Technology, Co. Ltd., and Vautron Rechenzentrum AG using the same identities on the same dates.� For example, on May 2, 2016, Domain Names were registered at both registrars using the names Marian Garcia, Evan Swanson, Bridgette Latimer, and Alison Stocks.� Other commonalities include, of course, that the Domain Names contain the CIALIS trademark and all of the Domain Names were registered in 2015 and 2016.

Breed-Specific Dog Skin & Ear Problems in German Shepherds Part 1: Allergy Conditions

(citations to the record omitted).� Based on the foregoing uncontradicted evidence in the record, the Panel concludes the Complainant has established that the all of the domain names described in this proceeding are under common control within the meaning of Paragraph 3(c).� One exception concerns Respondent Dr. Adam Joo, which is discussed below. Preliminary Issue B: Consent to Transfer / Identity Theft One of the many Respondents, Dr. Adam Joo, has submitted a formal Response stating he has not registered or authorized registration of the , , and domain names.� Respondent Joo has stated he �does not object to transfer or cancellation of the domain names and is willing to execute a transfer agreement of said domain names.�� Implicit in his Response is a claim of stolen identity as he disclaims any knowledge of the registration of the foregoing domains. After the initiation of this proceeding, Nanjing Imperiosus Technology Co. Ltd. and Vautron Rechenzentrum AG placed holds on Respondent Joo�s accounts and therefore he cannot transfer these domain names while this proceeding is still pending.� Accordingly, because Respondent Joo has not contested the transfer of the three domain names but instead agrees to transfer the domain names in question to Complainant, the Panel chooses to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the , , and domain names.� See Boehringer Ingelheim Int�l GmbH v. Modern Ltd.

Why U.S. Men Are Turning to Canada for Their Cialis Prescriptions

16, 2007) (finding that a USPTO trademark registration adequately demonstrates a complainant�s rights in a mark under Policy � 4(a)(i)). Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant has demonstrated its rights in the CIALIS mark pursuant to Policy � 4(a)(i). Complainant argues that all of the domain names identified in this proceeding are confusingly similar to the CIALIS mark through the incorporation of the mark fully, and with the addition of generic/descriptive words like �buy,� �cheap,� and �generic,� geographic terms �Canada� or �Canadian,� along with gTLDs �.com,� �.org,� or �.net.� Neither the addition of generic, descriptive nor geographic terms serve to adequately distinguish a respondent�s domain from a mark in which a complainant has rights.

Is there any option for express shipping?

Are Canadian pills the same quality?

� Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan.

Patient Suitability and Cost-Saving Tips

Ltd. and Vautron Rechenzentrum AG placed holds on Respondent Joo�s accounts and therefore he cannot transfer these domain names while this proceeding is still pending.� Accordingly, because Respondent Joo has not contested the transfer of the three domain names but instead agrees to transfer the domain names in question to Complainant, the Panel chooses to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the , , and domain names.� See Boehringer Ingelheim Int�l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. � Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Disney Enters., Inc.

Cialis (Tadalafil) Information

v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (�[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant�s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.�). Preliminary Issue C: Language of the Proceedings Complainant requests that the language of this administrative proceeding proceed in the English language pursuant to UDRP Rule 11(a).� Complainant makes this request in light of the Chinese language Registration Agreements.� It is established practice to take UDRP Rules 10(b) and (c) into consideration for the purpose of determining the language of the proceeding to ensure fairness and justice to both parties. Complainant argues that the domain names at issue resolve to hosted websites in English and all of the domain names were registered incorporating the Complainant�s CIALIS mark and English words such as �buy,� �cheap� and �generic.� �Pursuant to UDRP Rule 11(a), the Panel finds that persuasive evidence has been produced by Complainant to show that is most probable that the Respondents are conversant and proficient in the English language. �Accordingly, the Panel holds that the proceeding should be in English.� See The Argento Wine Company Limited v.

Is there a need for a prescription to buy Cialis online?

Argento Beijing Trading Company, D2009-0610 (WIPO July 1, 2009) (panel exercising discretion in deciding that the language of the proceedings advance in English, contrary to the Registration Agreement, based on evidence that respondent has command of the language).� Complainant has registered the CIALIS trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (�USPTO�) (Reg. The trademark registrations with the USPTO demonstrate Complainant�s rights in its mark for the purposes of Policy � 4(a)(i). Co. v. Bonds, FA 873143 (Forum Feb. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (�[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant�s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.�). Preliminary Issue C: Language of the Proceedings Complainant requests that the language of this administrative proceeding proceed in the English language pursuant to UDRP Rule 11(a).� Complainant makes this request in light of the Chinese language Registration Agreements.� It is established practice to take UDRP Rules 10(b) and (c) into consideration for the purpose of determining the language of the proceeding to ensure fairness and justice to both parties.

How to Verify a Legitimate Canadian Online Pharmacy

Complainant argues that the domain names at issue resolve to hosted websites in English and all of the domain names were registered incorporating the Complainant�s CIALIS mark and English words such as �buy,� �cheap� and �generic.� �Pursuant to UDRP Rule 11(a), the Panel finds that persuasive evidence has been produced by Complainant to show that is most probable that the Respondents are conversant and proficient in the English language. �Accordingly, the Panel holds that the proceeding should be in English.� See The Argento Wine Company Limited v. Argento Beijing Trading Company, D2009-0610 (WIPO July 1, 2009) (panel exercising discretion in deciding that the language of the proceedings advance in English, contrary to the Registration Agreement, based on evidence that respondent has command of the language).� Complainant has registered the CIALIS trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (�USPTO�) (Reg.

The trademark registrations with the USPTO demonstrate Complainant�s rights in its mark for the purposes of Policy � 4(a)(i). Co. v. Bonds, FA 873143 (Forum Feb. 16, 2007) (finding that a USPTO trademark registration adequately demonstrates a complainant�s rights in a mark under Policy � 4(a)(i)). Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant has demonstrated its rights in the CIALIS mark pursuant to Policy � 4(a)(i). Complainant argues that all of the domain names identified in this proceeding are confusingly similar to the CIALIS mark through the incorporation of the mark fully, and with the addition of generic/descriptive words like �buy,� �cheap,� and �generic,� geographic terms �Canada� or �Canadian,� along with gTLDs �.com,� �.org,� or �.net.� Neither the addition of generic, descriptive nor geographic terms serve to adequately distinguish a respondent�s domain from a mark in which a complainant has rights.