WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Philip Morris Products S.A. v. Ong Nguyen Quang Hung, Ong Nguyen Quang Hung Case No. D2018-1274 1. The Parties

The Complainant is Philip Morris Products S.A. of Neuchâtel, Switzerland, represented by Boehmert & Boehmert, Germany.

The Respondent is Ong Nguyen Quang Hung, Ong Nguyen Quang Hung of Ho Chi Minh, Viet Nam. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name (the “disputed Domain Name”) is registered with Mat Bao Trading & Service Company Limited d/b/a Mat Bao (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed in English with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on June 7, 2018. On June 7, 2018, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed Domain Name. On June 8, 2018, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.

On June 15, 2018, the Center sent an email in English and Vietnamese to the Parties regarding the language of the proceeding. The Complainant requested that English be the language of the proceeding on June 18, 2018. The Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding by the specific due date.

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent in English and Vietnamese of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on June 22, 2018. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was July 12, 2018. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on July 13, 2018.

The Center appointed Emmanuelle Ragot as the sole panelist in this matter on July 20, 2018. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.

In the present case the Complainant does not have specific information on the language of the Registration Agreement, and requested that English be the language of the proceeding. The Registrar confirmed in its verification that the language of the Registration Agreement is Vietnamese. However, there is evidence showing that the Respondent is capable of communicating in English. The Website provided under the disputed Domain Name is an online shop which is partially addressing the users in English. For example the Website welcomes the users in English and the headings are in English.

The Panel finds that numerous past UDRP panels have accepted English as the language of the proceedings despite the Registration Agreement having a differing language, where it could be presumed from the circumstances of the case that the respondent had knowledge of the English language, while the complainant is not capable of providing the complaint in the language of the Registration Agreement (e.g. Vietnamese) without unreasonable effort and costs. In such cases it was found that to require the complainant to translate the complaint and all supporting documents into e.g. Chinese would cause an unnecessary burden to the complainant and unnecessarily delay the proceeding (see Johnson & Johnson v. Ba Pham Thi Lan Phuong,WIPO Case No. D2017-1526, Orlane S.A. v. Yu Zhou He / He Yu Zhou,WIPO Case No. D2016-1763, Groupe Auchan v. Yang Yi,WIPO Case No. D2014-2094,Laverana GmbH & Co. KG v. Silkewang, Jiangsu Yun Lin Culture Communication Co., Ltd. / xia men yi ming wang luo you xian gong si,WIPO Case No. D2016-0721). 4. Factual Background

The Complainant is a company which is part of the group of companies affiliated to Philip Morris International Inc. (jointly referred to as “PMI”). PMI is the leading international tobacco company, with products sold in approximately 180 countries. PMI’s unequaled brand portfolio contains brands like Marlboro, the world’s number one international selling cigarette brand since 1972. Information about PMI and its business are available on PMI’s corporate website at “”.

In the course of transforming its business from combustible cigarettes to Reduced Risk Products (or “RRPs”, supposedly likely to represent, or have the potential to present less risk of harm to smokers who switch to those products versus continued smoking), PMI has developed a number of products. One of these RRPs developed and sold by PMI is branded iQOS. iQOS branded product is a precisely controlled heating device into which specially designed tobacco products under the brand names “Heets” or “HeatSticks” are inserted to generate a flavorful nicotine-containing aerosol. iQOS branded product was first introduced in Nagoya, Japan in 2014. Today iQOS branded product is available in key cities in around 38 markets across the world. So far the iQOS branded product has exclusively been distributed through PMI’s official stores and websites and selected authorized distributors and retailers. The Complainant has not yet commercialized its iQOS branded products in Viet Nam.

In respect of its RRPs, the Complainant owns a large portfolio of well-known trademarks.

The Complainant is the owner of the IQOS trademarks worldwide and this extensive portfolio includes a variety of different trademark applications and registrations.

The Complainant further owns a vast trademark portfolio for its iQOS brands as well as the registered slogan “iQOS This Changes Everything.” Among them, but by no means limited to, are the following trademark registrations (referred to as “Trademarks”):

-International Registration IQOS (word) N