WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION AGFA-Gevaert N.V. v. agfa azzalea / agfastore Case No. D2018-1673 1. The Parties

Complainant is AGFA-Gevaert N.V. of Septestraat Mortsel, Belgium, represented by Novagraaf Belgium NV/SA, Belgium.

Respondent is agfa azzalea / agfastore of Jawa Barat, Indonesia. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainR (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on July 24, 2018. On July 24, 2018, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On July 25, 2018, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.

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 Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on July 26, 2018. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was August 15, 2018. Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified Respondent’s default on August 16, 2018.

The Center appointed Robert A. Badgley as the sole panelist in this matter on August 23, 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. 4. Factual Background

Complainant is a diversified manufacturer of various products sold business-to-business, such as chemical products used for photographic and other applications, toners and printing inks, cleaning products used in the printing process, printing machines and parts for printing machines or systems, “medical, surgical, cardiological, veterinary and dental apparatus and instruments,” medical and x-ray-related products and instruments, plastic films for industrial applications, polyester and other fabric for use in digital printing, and other products and applications.

Complainant holds a number of trademark registrations for the mark AGFA. For example, Complainant holds European Union Intellectual Property Office (“EUIPO”) Registration No. 003353463 registered on January 24, 2005, EUIPO Registration No. 015598113 registered on February 27, 2017, and EUIPO Registration No. 008820979 registered on May 7, 2010. The latter AGFA mark is registered in connection with “pharmaceutical and other preparations for medical purposes…”

The Domain Name was registered on March 13, 2018. At the time of the filing of the Complaint, the Domain Name resolved to a website offering health and beauty products for sale. The products offered at Respondent’s online “Agfa Store” include goods which are claimed to “protect from germs,” “reduce inflammation,” “make skin healthier,” and “help protect the body from skin cancer.” Currently, the Domain Name does not resolve to an active website. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

Complainant asserts that it has established the three elements required under the Policy for a transfer of the Domain Name. According to Complainant, its AFGA marks are “so famous that Respondent could not ignore the preexistence of Complainant’s trademark rights” and “must have been fully aware of [the marks] when selecting the [Domain Name].” B. Respondent

Respondent did not reply to Compla