Appmounjaro.online + 63 more domains

The timeline behind appmounjaro.online

Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.

How each disputed name was decided in this proceeding.

Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.

ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Eli Lilly and Company v. Booster Company, booster company, Whois Agent, Netlify Inc, Rodrigo Nunes Nascimento, E-ATROS, kleber Almeida batista capeleti, Vittafarm Nutraceuticos Ltda, Vittafarm Nutraceuticos Ltda, Jessica Perez, Croma sship, Premier Produtos, Premier Produtos Digitais, bwtg social, Metodos Inteligentes, Eduardo Rodrigues Menelli, RegC, Luiz Benetton Neto, Pedro Pacitti, Mounjaro De Pobres, ozzy spielmann, Gabriel Rocha, Benjamim Sueto Mondlane Junior, Lucas Sousa, Notify, Marcello Lucio, ARUZA PONZIO, VINICIUS RIBEIRO, Caio Mitsumoto, Mundo Wonder Mundo Wonder, Natalia Pereira da Silva, Pedro Henrique, Rafael Lima, 50.445.331 RAFAEL LIMA DA ENCARNACAO, Jose Luis Rotert piva, AL DIGITAL, Raphael Almeida, ARES COMPANY LTDA, Raphael Moura, ARES COMPANY LTDA, Thiado marcos, BERNARDO CERUTTI, Mark Zu, Joao Gabriel F M, Joel Campos, Fabio Alves, Edina Camargo, Cleia Regina, Lorenzo Davi, Amanda Nascimento, hauan araujo, Filipe Bloisi, Mounjaro de Pobre, Thallyce MOREIRA, Carlion Arruaneira, MARCO ALENCAR, JORGE SANTOS, Joao Henrique Batista, João Henrique Batista, silvio nunes, Ryan Nobrega, Luiz Henrique, Luiz Eduardo Gonzaga Prazeres, OP CL, Gabriel Tavares, Oliver Moreno, LUCAS MACHADO, Artur Moura, Empresa de infoprodutos, Danilo Lovik Carmem da Mota, AWX Digital, AWX Digital, Vinicius Barbosa, Sthefany Silva, seventeen, Ederson Michel Santos, Marcelo Soares, Cibele Silva, Goiabashop, amanda santos de souza, and Gabriel Marques Case No. D2025-3503 1. The Parties The Complainant is Eli Lilly and Company, United States of America (“United States”), internally represented. The Respondents are Booster Company, booster company, Rodrigo Nunes Nascimento, E-ATROS, kleber Almeida batista capeleti, Vittafarm Nutraceuticos Ltda, Vittafarm Nutraceuticos Ltda, Jessica Perez, Croma sship, Premier Produtos, Premier Produtos Digitais, bwtg social, Metodos Inteligentes, Eduardo Rodrigues Menelli, RegC, Luiz Benetton Neto, Pedro Pacitti, Mounjaro De Pobres, ozzy spielmann, Gabriel Rocha, Lucas Sousa, Notify, Marcello Lucio, ARUZA PONZIO, VINICIUS RIBEIRO, Caio Mitsumoto, Mundo Wonder page 2 Mundo Wonder, Natalia Pereira da Silva, Pedro Henrique, Rafael Lima, 50.445.331 RAFAEL LIMA DA ENCARNACAO, Jose Luis Rotert piva, AL DIGITAL, Raphael Almeida, ARES COMPANY LTDA, Raphael Moura, ARES COMPANY LTDA, Thiado marcos, BERNARDO CERUTTI, Mark Zu, Joao Gabriel F M, Joel Campos, Fabio Alves, Edina Camargo, Cleia Regina, Lorenzo Davi, Amanda Nascimento, hauan araujo, Filipe Bloisi, Mounjaro de Pobre, Thallyce MOREIRA, Carlion Arruaneira, MARCO ALENCAR, JORGE SANTOS, Joao Henrique Batista, João Henrique Batista, silvio nunes, Ryan Nobrega, Luiz Henrique, Luiz Eduardo Gonzaga Prazeres, OP CL, Gabriel Tavares, Oliver Moreno, LUCAS MACHADO, Artur Moura, Empresa de infoprodutos, Danilo Lovik Carmem da Mota, AWX Digital, AWX Digital, Vinicius Barbosa, Sthefany Silva, seventeen, Ederson Michel Santos, Marcelo Soares, Cibele Silva, Goiabashop, amanda santos de souza, Gabriel Marques, Brazil, Benjamim Sueto Mondlane Junior, Mozambique, and Whois Agent, Netlify Inc, United States. 2. The Domain Names and Registrars The disputed domain names <mounjarodepobres.com>, <mounjarodeprateleira.com>, <appmounjaro.online>, <oficialmounjaro.online>, <mounjarodelospobres.online>, <mounjaropobre.site>, <protocolomounjaronatural.com>, <mounjarodepobre.live>, and <mounjaropb.com> are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC. The disputed domain names <mounjaro-de-pobre.site>, <mounjaro-depobre.shop>, <mounjarocasero.xyz>, <mounjarodepobrequizz.site>, <mounjaroficial.shop>, <mounjarohome.site>, <mounjaroo.site>, <mounjarooficial.shop>, <mounjaroreal.shop>, <omounjaroficial.com>, <mounjaro-official.online>, <mounjarodepobre.space>, <mounjarocaseiro.store>, <mounjaro-caseiro.site>, <mounjarodepobrebr.site>, <mounjaropobre.shop>, <naturalmounjaropobre.shop>, <mounjarodepobre.pro>, <mounjarodepobre2025.shop>, <mounjarodepobrecaseiro.online>, <mounjaroeficaz.site>, <mounjarodepobreofc.shop>, <mounjarodepobre.cloud>, <pobremounjaro.lat>, <oficialmounjarodepobre.com>, <mounjaropobree.online>, <mounjarodopobre.shop>, <mounjarodepobre2.shop>, <mounjarodepobree.shop>, <mounjarodopobre.online>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.shop>, <mounjaro-paguemenos.shop>, <mounjarocaseiro.shop>, <mounjarodepobrereceita.site>, <mounjarolight.site>, <consultamounjaro.site>, <metodomounjaro.site>, <protocolomounjaro.site>, <mounjarocaseiro.com>, <mounjarocaseiro.online>, <mounjarocaseiro.site>, <mounjarocaseirobr.site>, <mounjaro-depobre.site>, <omounjarodepobre.online>, <mounjarodepobreoficial.store>, <projetomounjaronatural.site>, and <mounjaropromo.online> are registered with Hostinger Operations, UAB. The disputed domain names <mounjarodepobreoficial.com> and <poorgirlsmounjaro.com> are registered with Name SRS AB. The disputed domain name <mounjaro-de-pobre.online> is registered with Name.com, Inc. The disputed domain name <mounjarodepobre.website> is registered with IONOS SE. The disputed domain names <mounjaroeficaz.com>, <mounjaroparapobre.com>, <mounjaroemgotas.shop>, and <mounjaropobre.fit> are registered with NameCheap, Inc. GoDaddy.com, LLC, Hostinger Operations, UAB, Name SRS AB, Name.com, Inc., IONOS SE, and NameCheap, Inc. are referred to below separately and collectively as the “Registrar”. 3. Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on August 28, 2025. On the following day, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar requests for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain names. On August 29, September 1, September 2, and September 18, 2025, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification responses disclosing registrant and page 3 contact information for the disputed domain names that differed from the named Respondent (“Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC”) and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on September 9, 2025, and a follow-up email on September 19, 2025, with the registrant and contact information of nominally multiple underlying registrants revealed by the Registrars, requesting the Complainant to either file separate complaints for the disputed domain names associated with different underlying registrants or alternatively, demonstrate that the underlying registrants are in fact the same entity and/or that all disputed domain names are under common control. The Complainant filed first and second amendments to the Complaint on September 15, 2025, and September 23, 2025, respectively. The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendments to 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 Respondents of the Complaint and the first and second amendments to the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on September 26, 2025. The original due date for Response was October 16, 2025. The Center received email communications from certain Respondents and other parties on September 26, September 27, September 29, September 30, October 3, October 4, October 7, and October 8, 2025. Further to a settlement form received regarding a domain name, the Center issued a Notification of Suspension on October 13, 2025 until November 12, 2025 for the purposes of settlement regarding that domain name. At the request of the Complainant, the suspension of the proceeding was extended until December 12, 2025. The Center received further email communications from certain Respondents and other parties on November 17, December 2, and December 18, 2025. The Complainant made an unsolicited supplemental filing on December 17, 2025. The proceeding was reinstituted as of December 18, 2025. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the new due date for Response was December 23, 2025. The Center commenced the panel appointment process on January 6, 2026. The Center appointed Matthew Kennedy as the sole panelist in this matter on January 13, 2026. 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 The Complainant is a pharmaceutical company. In June, 2022, it launched a drug for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes in the United States under the brand name MOUNJARO; it has since obtained marketing authorization for that product for that use in many other countries, including Brazil. MOUNJARO is also widely used for weight loss. The Complainant reported sales of MOUNJARO worth over USD 5.16 billion in fiscal year 2023 and over USD 11.5 billion in fiscal year 2024. The Complainant holds multiple trademark registrations for MOUNJARO, including the following: − Brazilian trademark registration number 919475787, registered on November 24, 2020; and − United States trademark registration number 6809369, registered on August 2, 2022. The above trademark registrations are current. The Complainant also registered the domain name <mounjaro.com> on October 21, 2019, which redirects to the subdomain <mounjaro.lilly.com>, which has been associated with a website since at least May 17, 2022, where the Complainant advertises and provides information regarding its MOUNJARO product. page 4 The Respondents are named as various individuals and, in some cases, organizations. They are all based in Brazil, except for Benjamim Sueto Mondlane Junior, who is based in Mozambique, and WhoIs Agent, Netlify Inc, who is based in the United States. The disputed domain names were registered on the dates and in the names shown in the following table: Date of registration Disputed domain name Registrant March 30, 2025 <projetomounjaronatural.site> Cibele Silva, Goiabashop April 4, 2025 <mounjaro-caseiro.site> Mark Zu April 28, 2025 <omounjaroficial.com> Raphael Almeida, ARES COMPANY LTDA May 4, 2025 <mounjarodepobre.space> Thiado marcos May 4, 2025 <mounjaro-official.online> Raphael Moura, ARES COMPANY LTDA May 5, 2025 <mounjaropobre.site> Gabriel Marques May 10, 2025 <mounjaro-de-pobre.online> Whois Agent, Netlify Inc May 10, 2025 <mounjaro-depobre.site> Sthefany Silva, seventeen May 19, 2025 <mounjarodopobre.online> Ryan Nobrega May 19, 2025 <omounjarodepobre.online> Ederson Michel Santos May 20, 2025 <mounjarocaseiro.com> AWX Digital, AWX Digital May 21, 2025 <mounjarodepobrebr.site> Joao Gabriel F M May 22, 2025 <mounjarocaseiro.online> Vinicius Barbosa May 24, 2025 <protocolomounjaronatural.com> Luiz Benetton Neto May 25, 2025 <mounjarocaseiro.store> BERNARDO CERUTTI May 27, 2025 <mounjaropobre.shop> Joel Campos May 30, 2025 <mounjarocaseiro.site> Booster Company, booster company May 30, 2025 <mounjarocaseirobr.site> Booster Company, booster company June 1, 2025 <naturalmounjaropobre.shop> Fabio Alves June 4, 2025 <mounjarodeprateleira.com> Pedro Pacitti June 4, 2025 <mounjaroficial.shop> Natalia Pereira da Silva June 5, 2025 <mounjarodepobrequizz.site> Mundo Wonder Mundo Wonder June 5, 2025 <mounjaro-depobre.shop> VINICIUS RIBEIRO June 5, 2025 <mounjarohome.site> Booster Company, booster company June 7, 2025 <mounjarooficial.shop> Rafael Lima, 50.445.331 RAFAEL LIMA DA ENCARNACAO June 8, 2025 <mounjarodepobreoficial.com> kleber Almeida batista capeleti June 10, 2025 <mounjaro-de-pobre.site> ARUZA PONZIO June 12, 2025 <mounjaroo.site> Pedro Henrique June 13, 2025 <mounjarodepobres.com> Mounjaro De Pobres June 13, 2025 <mounjaroreal.shop> Jose Luis Rotert piva, AL DIGITAL June 14, 2025 <mounjarocasero.xyz> Caio Mitsumoto June 15, 2025 <mounjaroparapobre.com> Premier Produtos, Premier Produtos Digitais June 16, 2025 <mounjarodepobrereceita.site> Gabriel Tavares June 18, 2025 <appmounjaro.online> Gabriel Rocha June 18, 2025 <mounjarolight.site> Oliver Moreno June 19, 2025 <mounjaroemgotas.shop> Jessica Perez, Croma sship June 20, 2025 <mounjarodepobre.pro> Edina Camargo June 26, 2025 <mounjarodepobre2025.shop> Cleia Regina June 26, 2025 <mounjaroeficaz.com> bwtg social, Metodos Inteligentes June 27, 2025 <mounjarocaseiro.shop> OP CL June 27, 2025 <mounjaro-de-pobre.shop> Luiz Henrique page 5 June 27, 2025 <mounjaroeficaz.site> Amanda Nascimento June 28, 2025 <oficialmounjaro.online> Benjamim Sueto Mondlane Junior June 29, 2025 <mounjaro-paguemenos.shop> Luiz Eduardo Gonzaga Prazeres July 4, 2025 <mounjarodepobre.cloud> Filipe Bloisi, Mounjaro de Pobre July 8, 2025 <mounjarodepobre.website> Eduardo Rodrigues Menelli, RegC July 9, 2025 <mounjarodepobreofc.shop> hauan araujo July 10, 2025 <mounjarodepobrecaseiro.online> Lorenzo Davi July 10, 2025 <poorgirlsmounjaro.com> Rodrigo Nunes Nascimento, E-ATROS July 13, 2025 <mounjarodepobree.shop> silvio nunes July 14, 2025 <protocolomounjaro.site> Danilo Lovik Carmem da Mota July 19, 2025 <metodomounjaro.site> Artur Moura, Empresa de infoprodutos July 19, 2025 <pobremounjaro.lat> Thallyce MOREIRA July 21, 2025 <mounjarodepobre2.shop> Joao Henrique Batista, João Henrique Batista July 21, 2025 <oficialmounjarodepobre.com> Carlion Arruaneira July 22, 2025 <mounjarodelospobres.online> Lucas Sousa, Notify July 22, 2025 <mounjarodopobre.shop> JORGE SANTOS July 24, 2025 <consultamounjaro.site> LUCAS MACHADO July 26, 2025 <mounjaropobree.online> MARCO ALENCAR July 29, 2025 <mounjaropobre.fit> Vittafarm, Nutraceuticos Ltda July 30, 2025 <mounjaropb.com> ozzy spielmann August 6, 2025 <mounjarodepobre.live> Marcello Lucio August 7, 2025 <mounjarodepobreoficial.store> Marcelo Soares August 7, 2025 <mounjaropromo.online> amanda santos de souza The majority of the disputed domain names resolve to websites in Portuguese offering a so-called “Mounjaro de pobre” (meaning “poor man’s Mounjaro”) or other so-called Mounjaro alternative, as a weight loss product. The websites may offer consultations regarding that product or a recipe to make it and, in some cases, they offer additional products. Four disputed domain names resolve to websites with unrelated content. 1 The other 18 disputed domain names do not resolve to any active website; rather, they are passively held. 2 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant The Complainant contends that it has satisfied each of the elements required under the Policy for a transfer of the disputed domain names. Notably, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to its MOUNJARO mark. The Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names. Instead, they are using the disputed domain names intentionally to infringe upon the Complainant’s trademark rights by offering to sell unauthorized, competitive alternatives. The associated websites generally market weight 1 These are the disputed domain names <mounjarooficial.shop>, <mounjaro-caseiro.site>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.online>, and <projetomounjaronatural.site>. 2 These are the disputed domain names <mounjarodepobre.space>, <mounjaro-depobre.site>, <mounjarocaseiro.com>, <protocolomounjaronatural.com>, <mounjarocaseiro.site>, <mounjarocaseirobr.site>, <mounjarodeprateleira.com>, <mounjarohome.site>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.site>, <mounjarodepobrereceita.site>, <mounjaroemgotas.shop>, <mounjaroeficaz.com>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.shop>, <mounjaro-paguemenos.shop>, <mounjarodepobre.cloud>, <mounjarodepobreofc.shop>, <mounjarodepobree.shop>, and <mounjaropobre.fit>. page 6 loss products, expressly promoted as a “poor man’s” alternative to the Complainant’s product. These products are not sponsored, endorsed, or licensed by the Complainant. Further, nowhere do the Respondents offer the Complainant’s products; rather, they sell competitor products. The Respondents’ activities amount to passing off infringing goods as the Complainant’s by using the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark within the disputed domain names while promoting products via the websites. The Complainant has not given the Respondents permission, authorization, consent, or license to use its MOUNJARO mark. The disputed domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith. The Respondents are using the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark to drive Internet traffic to their websites to profit from the sale of infringing, competitive products, purporting to be a “poor man’s” alternative to the Complainant’s product. The content of the websites misleads Internet users into believing that there is an association between the Complainant and the websites and serves as evidence of an intentional attempt to attract Internet users to the disputed domain names for commercial gain in bad faith by creating a likelihood of confusion with the MOUNJARO mark. The Respondents’ use of the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark in the disputed domain names is potentially harmful to the health of many unsuspecting consumers. The changing content of the associated websites does not prevent a finding of bad faith under the “passive holding” doctrine. B. Respondents The Respondent Eduardo Rodrigues Menelli, RegC agrees to the transfer of his disputed domain name and acknowledges the trademark rights in MOUNJARO. He also submits that he no longer has access to his disputed domain name. The Respondent Gabriel Tavares accepts the suspension of his disputed domain name, does not contest the case, and consents to transfer. The Respondent Marcello Lucio confirms that he does not wish to contest the case and consents to the transfer of his disputed domain name to the Complainant. The Respondent BERNARDO CERUTTI asks the Center not to reach out to him. The Respondent VINICIUS RIBEIRO submits in Portuguese that he did not use his disputed domain name but was unable to delete it. The Respondent Natalia Pereira da Silva confirmed that she would not submit a Response. The Respondent JORGE SANTOS submits in Portuguese that the disputed domain name <mounjarodopobre.shop> has never been used for commercial purposes but was registered solely for an IT course as he was testing hosting resources and the publication of webpages for educational purposes. He has requested deletion of the disputed domain name. The other Respondents did not respond to the Complaint. 6. Discussion and Findings 6.1 Preliminary Issues A. Consolidation: Multiple Respondents The amended Complaint was filed in relation to nominally different domain name registrants. The Complainant alleges that the domain name registrants are the same entity or mere alter egos of each other, or under common control. The Complainant requests the consolidation of the Complaint against the multiple disputed domain name registrants pursuant to paragraph 10(e) of the Rules. The disputed domain name registrants did not comment on the Complainant’s request. Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules states that a complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder. page 7 In addressing the Complainant’s request, the Panel will consider whether (i) the disputed domain names or corresponding websites are subject to common control; and (ii) the consolidation would be fair and equitable to all Parties. See WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 4.11.2. As regards common control, the Panel notes that all 64 disputed domain names were registered within a relatively short period of time between March 30, 2025 and July 26, 2025, with many registered on the same days. All the registrants (except two) are based in Brazil. All the disputed domain names combine the MOUNJARO mark with other terms, mostly in Portuguese, or letters. Most disputed domain names, or their associated websites, or both, refer to a natural tea variously described as “Mounjaro de pobre” (meaning “poor man’s Mounjaro”), “Mounjaro caseiro” (meaning “homemade Mounjaro”), “Mounjaro natural” (meaning “natural Mounjaro”), “Mounjaro de prateleira” (meaning “off -the-shelf Mounjaro”) and “Mounjaro home”. Many of the websites display the same content. Several disputed domain names incorporate the word “oficial” (meaning “official”), usually with a reference to the natural tea in the domain name or on the associated website. While the disputed domain name <mounjaroeficaz.com> (meaning “effective Mounjaro”) does not contain any of these terms and currently lacks an associated website, the second-level domain name is identical to the disputed domain name <mounjaroeficaz.site> registered the following day that resolves to a website for the natural tea. While the disputed domain names <mounjaroemgotas.shop> (meaning “Mounjaro in drops”) and <mounjaro-paguemenos.shop> (meaning “Mounjaro-pay less”) contain different terms from the others and currently lack associated websites, they both combine MOUNJARO with Portuguese terms and were registered on or about the same days as other disputed domain names. Accordingly, based on the record, the Panel is satisfied that all the disputed domain names are under common control. As regards fairness and equity, the Panel sees no reason why consolidation of the disputes would be unfair or inequitable to any Party. Accordingly, the Panel decides to consolidate the disputes regarding the nominally different disputed domain name registrants (referred to below as “the Respondent”) in a single proceeding. B. Unsolicited Supplemental Filing The Complainant made an unsolicited supplemental filing on December 17, 2025, after the notification of the Complaint, as amended. This filing purported to make a third amendment to the Complaint, annexing an email communication from the Respondent Eduardo Rodrigues Menelli, RegC and adding arguments related to it. However, the Panel notes that that email was sent by the Respondent to the Center on September 26, 2025, and is already part of the record of this proceeding. While the additional arguments would not alter the Panel’s conclusions, the Panel declines to accept the Complainant’s unsolicited supplemental filing. C. Informal Consent to Transfer The Panel notes that the Respondent (Eduardo Rodrigues Menelli, RegC, Marcello Lucio, and Gabriel Tavares) consents on the record to the transfer of the corresponding disputed domain names (<mounjarodepobre.website>, <mounjarodepobre.live>, and <mounjarodepobrereceita.site>, respectively). The first two resolve to websites offering so-called poor man’s Mounjaro or a consultation regarding this product, while the third is passively held. Even though the Parties have not settled these disputes using the standard settlement process, the Respondent unambiguously expresses its consent to a transfer in each case. The Complainant has not expressed a preference for a decision on the merits with respect to these disputed domain names. Therefore, the Panel will order a transfer of the disputed domain names <mounjarodepobre.website>, <mounjarodepobre.live> and <mounjarodepobrereceita.site> on the basis of the Respondent’s consent. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 4.10. page 8 6.2 Substantive Issues P aragraph 4(a) of the Policy provides that a complainant must demonstrate each of the following elements with respect to each of the 61 remaining disputed domain names: ( i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and ( ii) the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and ( iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. The burden of proof of eac h element is borne by the Complainant. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. T he standing (or threshold) test for confusing similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightforward comparison between the Complainant’s trademark and t he disputed domain name. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7. The Complainant has shown rights in respect of the MOUNJARO trademark for the purposes of the Policy. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.2.1. Each disputed domain name wholly incorporates the MOUNJARO mark. They add other terms, including “caseiro” (meaning “homemade”), “natural”, “oficial” (meaning “official”), “de (or do) pobre” (meaning “poor man’s”), “app”, “ consulta” (meaning “consultation”), “eficaz” (meaning “effective”), “em gotas” (meaning “in drops”), “home”, “ light”, “ pague menos” (meaning “pay less”), “metodo” (meaning “method”), “poor girls”, “ de prateleira” (meaning “off-the-shelf”), “projeto” (meaning “project”), “promo”, “protocolo” (meaning “protocol”), “quizz”, “ real”, and, in two cases, numerals (“2” or “2025”), or they add letters (“e”, which duplicates the final letter in “pobre”, “pb”, which may be short for “pobre”, “ofc”, which may be short for “oficial”, “o”, which may be the definite article before t he mark or a plural after the mark, “br” which is the acronym for Brazil). Despite the addition of these other terms, numerals, and letters, the MOUNJARO mark is clearly recognizable within each disputed domain name. T he only additional element in each disputed domain name is a generic Top- Level Domain (“gTLD”) extension (variously, “.cloud”, “.com”, “.fit”, “.lat”, “.online”, “.shop”, “.site”, “.store”, “.website”, or “.xyz”) which, as a standard requirement of domain name registration, may be disregarded in the assessment of confusing similarity. See WIPO Overview 3.0, sections 1.7, 1.8 and 1.11.1. Accordingly, the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to t he MOUNJARO mark for the purposes of the Policy. Therefore, the Panel finds the first element of the Policy has been established. B. Rights or Legitimate Interests Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances i n which t he Respondent may demonstrate rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name. Although the overall burden of proof in UDRP proceedings is on t he complainant, panels have recognized that proving a respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in a domain name may result in the difficult task of “proving a negative”, requiring information that is often primarily within t he knowledge or control of the respondent. As such, where a complainant makes out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to t he respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name (although the burden of proof always remains on t he complainant). If the respondent fails to come forward with such relevant evidence, the complainant is deemed to have satisfied the second element. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.1. page 9 In the present case, the disputed domain names wholly incorporate the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark. The Complainant submits that it has not given the Respondents permission, authorization, consent, or license to use that mark. Out of 61 disputed domain names under consideration, 44 resolve to active websites. In almost all these cases, the disputed domain name, or the associated website, or both, refers to the so-called poor man’s/homemade/natural Mounjaro as a weight loss product. 3 Although such references disclose that the product offered is not genuine MOUNJARO, the Respondent is still trading upon the name, goodwill and reputation of the Complainant’s mark by misleadingly attracting Internet users to offer an alleged alternative for commercial gain. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13.1. One exception is the disputed domain name <mounjarooficial.shop>, which combines the mark with a word meaning “official”, implying that it will resolve to an authorized website selling MOUNJARO when in fact the associated website currently displays information about cloaking technology, which is unrelated to the Complainant or MOUNJARO. 4 The other 17 disputed domain names under consideration do not currently resolve to any active website but are passively held. None of these circumstances indicates that the Respondent is using any of these 61 disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services. The Registrar has verified that the Respondent’s names are as shown in Section 1 of this Decision, none of which resembles any disputed domain name. Nothing on the record indicates that the Respondent has been commonly known by the disputed domain names. None of the above circumstances shows that the Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of any of the disputed domain names. Having reviewed the available record, the Panel finds the Complainant has established a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. The Respondent alleges that the disputed domain name <mounjarodopobre.shop> has never been used for commercial purposes but was registered solely for an IT course. The Respondent does not explain why this disputed domain name incorporates the MOUNJARO trademark. In any case, his allegation is contradicted by the evidence, which shows that this disputed domain name resolves to a commercial website promoting the natural tea. Accordingly, the Respondent has not demonstrated any right or legitimate interest in respect of this disputed domain name. No Response to the substance of the Complainant’s contentions was provided regarding any other disputed domain name. Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Respondent has not rebutted the Complainant’s prima facie showing. Based on the record, the Panel finds the second element of the Policy has been established. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith The Panel notes that, for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, paragraph 4(b) of the Policy establishes circumstances, in particular, but without limitation, that, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith. The fourth circumstance is as follows: “(iv) by using the [disputed] domain name, [the respondent has] intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to [the respondent’s] website or other online location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of [the 3 In 3 of these cases the disputed domain name but not the associated website refers to the poor man’s/homemade/natural Mounjaro. These are <projetomounjaronatural.site>, which resolves to a website for a calisthenic workout plan, <mounjaro-caseiro.site>, which resolves to a website selling prayers to Our Lady Untier of Knots, and <mounjaro-de-pobre.online>, which resolves to a nearly blank page with an animal shelter header. 4 Another possible exception is <protocolomounjaro.site>, which resolves to a website offering a so-called Mounjaro Protocol, but that is later described as a regime to take “Mounjaro dos pobres” (meaning poor people’s Mounjaro). page 10 respondent’s] website or location or of a product or service on [the respondent’s] web site or location.” The disputed domain names were all registered in 2025, after the registration of the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark, including in Brazil and the United States where all but one of the Respondent’s contact addresses are located. The disputed domain names all wholly incorporate the MOUNJARO mark, which is a coined term. In many cases, the disputed domain name, or the associated website, or both, refers to a so- called poor man’s/homemade/natural Mounjaro, which gives rise to the inference that the Respondent is aware of a genuine MOUNJARO. 5 The Respondent provides no other explanation for the choice of the mark in the disputed domain names. In view of these circumstances, the Panel finds that the Respondent knew of the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark at the time when it registered the disputed domain names. Out of 61 disputed domain names under consideration, 44 resolve to active websites, most of which offer an alleged alternative for the Complainant’s product, and none of which offer the Complainant’s genuine products. Given the findings in Section 6.2B above, the Panel finds that by using these disputed domain names, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its websites, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s MOUNJARO mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent’s website or of a product on the Respondent’s websites, within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. As regards the other 17 disputed domain names under consideration, these do not currently resolve to any active website but are passively held. Panels have found that the non-use of a domain name would not prevent a finding of bad faith under the doctrine of passive holding. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.3. Having reviewed the available record, the Panel notes the distinctiveness of the Complainant’s MOUNJARO trademark, which is a coined term. These disputed domain names wholly incorporate that mark. Most misleadingly refer to a poor man’s/homemade alleged alternative to the MOUNJARO drug that is neither produced nor endorsed by the Complainant. Those that do not, refer instead to effective Mounjaro, or Mounjaro off-the-shelf/in drops/pay less, falsely implying that they will resolve to a website offering genuine Mounjaro drugs. Further, these disputed domain names are under common control with the other 44 disputed domain names, which are composed in a similar way and are being used actively in bad faith. In view of these circumstances, the Panel finds that the passive holding of 17 disputed domain names does not prevent a finding of bad faith under the Policy regarding all disputed domain names. Therefore, the Panel finds that the Complainant has established the third element of the Policy. 7. Decision For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain names <appmounjaro.online>, <consultamounjaro.site>, <metodomounjaro.site>, <mounjarocaseirobr.site>, <mounjarocaseiro.com>, <mounjarocaseiro.online>, <mounjarocaseiro.shop>, <mounjaro-caseiro.site>, <mounjarocaseiro.site>, <mounjarocaseiro.store>, <mounjarocasero.xyz>, <mounjarodelospobres.online>, <mounjarodepobrebr.site>, <mounjarodepobrecaseiro.online>, <mounjarodepobre.cloud>, <mounjarodepobree.shop>, <mounjarodepobre.live>, <mounjarodepobreofc.shop>, <mounjarodepobreoficial.com>, <mounjarodepobreoficial.store>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.online>, <mounjarodepobre.pro>, <mounjarodepobrequizz.site>, <mounjarodepobrereceita.site>, <mounjarodepobres.com>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.shop>, <mounjaro-depobre.shop>, <mounjaro-de-pobre.site>, <mounjaro- depobre.site>, <mounjarodepobre.space>, <mounjarodepobre.website>, <mounjarodepobre2.shop>, <mounjarodepobre2025.shop>, <mounjarodeprateleira.com>, <mounjarodopobre.online>, <mounjarodopobre.shop>, <mounjaroeficaz.com>, <mounjaroeficaz.site>, <mounjaroemgotas.shop>, <mounjaroficial.shop>, <mounjarohome.site>, <mounjarolight.site>, <mounjaro-official.online>, <mounjarooficial.shop>, <mounjaroo.site>, <mounjaro-paguemenos.shop>, <mounjaroparapobre.com>, 5 This includes the website associated with the disputed domain name <oficialmounjaro.online>, the registrant of which is based neither in Brazil nor the United States. page 11 <mounjaropb.com>, <mounjaropobree.online>, <mounjaropobre.fit>, <mounjaropobre.shop>, <mounjaropobre.site>, <mounjaropromo.online>, <mounjaroreal.shop>, <naturalmounjaropobre.shop>, <oficialmounjarodepobre.com>, <oficialmounjaro.online>, <omounjarodepobre.online>, <omounjaroficial.com>, <pobremounjaro.lat>, <poorgirlsmounjaro.com>, <projetomounjaronatural.site>, <protocolomounjaronatural.com>, and <protocolomounjaro.site> be transferred to the Complainant. /Matthew Kennedy/ Matthew Kennedy Sole Panelist Date: January 22, 2026

Source of record: WIPO . Reproduced for research; WIPO is the authoritative source.