Westmore · UDRP decision
FORUM · Case No. FA2601002202840

Abbvie-support.com

TransferFORUM-indexed · informational, not legal advice

The Panel ordered transfer of <abbvie-support.com>, finding it confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered ABBVIE mark, finding Respondent lacked rights or legitimate interests because it was not commonly known by the domain and made no active use of it, and finding bad-faith registration and use based on passive holding and Respondent’s knowledge of Complainant’s rights.

Outcome
Transfer
At a glance
Provider
FORUM
Outcome
Transfer
Decision date
2026-02-24
Panelist(s)
Sandra J. Franklin
Complainant
AbbVie Inc.
Respondent
Abbv Ast
Counsel
Molly Buck-Richard
Law firm
Richard Law Group, Inc.
Disputed domain(s)
abbvie-support.com
Citation weightCited by 1 later decision · relies on 8 authorities
Domain history UDRP Intelligence

The timeline behind abbvie-support.com

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

Westmore reconstructs the full history behind abbvie-support.com — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive — as part of UDRP Intelligence:

Registration → decision → today timeline
Archived Wayback evidence of what the site showed
Registry bad-faith signals
The live current registrant
Available in UDRP Intelligence
Verified public record
Outcome & remedy
Complaint granted. Panel ordered transfer of abbvie-support.com.
Reverse Domain Name Hijacking
No RDNH raised.
Westmore Insight

The Panel found bad faith because Respondent failed to make active use of the domain and registered it with full knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the ABBVIE mark.

The three-part test
Identical or confusingly similarMet
Rights or legitimate interestsMet
Registered and used in bad faithMet

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

Related decisions
Case details
Provider
FORUM
Outcome
Transfer
Decision date
2026-02-24
Panel
Sandra J. Franklin
Full decision
8 min read · hosted by Westmore

NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM DECISION AbbVie Inc. v. Abbv Ast Claim Number: FA2601002202840 PARTIES Complainant is AbbVie Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Molly Buck Richard of Richard Law Group, Inc., Texas, USA. Respondent is Abbv Ast ("Respondent"), Illinois, USA. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <abbvie-support.com>, registered with NameCheap, Inc. PANEL The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Sandra J. Franklin as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on January 30, 2026; Forum received payment on January 30, 2026. On February 2, 2026, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <abbvie-support.com> domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameCheap, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc. registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy"). On February 2, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 23, 2026 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@abbvie-support.com. Also on February 2, 2026, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts. Having received no response from Respondent, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. On February 24, 2026, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Sandra J. Franklin as Panelist. Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent. RELIEF SOUGHT Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant. PARTIES' CONTENTIONS A. Complainant 1. Respondent's <abbvie-support.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's ABBVIE mark. 2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <abbvie-support.com> domain name. 3. Respondent registered and uses the <abbvie-support.com> domain name in bad faith. B. Respondent did not file a Response. FINDINGS Complainant is a biopharmaceutical company. Complainant holds a registration for the ABBVIE mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") (Reg. No. 4,340,091, registered May 21, 2013). Respondent registered the <abbvie-support.com> domain name on January 12, 2026, and does not make an active use of the domain name. DISCUSSION Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and 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 view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) ("Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint"). Identical and/or Confusingly Similar The Panel finds that Complainant has rights in the ABBVIE mark based on registration with the USPTO. See Brooks Sports, Inc. v. Joyce Cheadle, FA 1819065 (Forum Dec. 28, 2018) (finding that Complainant's registration of the BROOKS mark with the USPTO sufficiently conferred its rights in the mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i)). Respondent's <abbvie-support.com> domain name uses the ABBVIE mark and simply adds a hyphen, "support", and ".com" gTLD. These changes do not sufficiently distinguish a disputed domain name from a mark for the purposes of Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Ant Small and Micro Financial Services Group Co., Ltd. v. Ant Fin, FA 1759326 (Forum Jan. 2, 2018) ("Respondent's <antfinancial-investorrelations.com> Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant's ANT FINANCIAL mark. It incorporates the mark entirely. It adds a hyphen, the descriptive terms "investor relations," and the ".com" gTLD, but these additions are insufficient to distinguish the Domain name from complainant's mark for the purposes of Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).") The Panel therefore finds that Respondent's <abbvie-support.com> domain name confusingly similar to Complainant's ABBVIE mark. The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). Rights or Legitimate Interests Once Complainant makes a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), the burden shifts to Respondent to show it does have rights or legitimate interests. See Advanced International Marketing Corporation v. AA-1 Corp, FA 780200 (Forum Nov. 2, 2011) (finding that a complainant must offer some evidence to make its prima facie case and satisfy Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii)); see also Neal & Massey Holdings Limited v. Gregory Ricks, FA 1549327 (Forum Apr. 12, 2014) ("Under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), Complainant must first make out a prima facie case showing that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in respect of an at-issue domain name and then the burden, in effect, shifts to Respondent to come forward with evidence of its rights or legitimate interests.") Complainant argues that Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the <abbvie-support.com> domain name because Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name and is not licensed or authorized to use Complainant's ABBVIE mark. The WHOIS information for the disputed domain name lists the registrant as "Abbv Ast". Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, and thus has no rights under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See Chevron Intellectual Property LLC v. Fred Wallace, FA 1626022 (Forum July 27, 2015) (finding that the respondent was not commonly known by the <chevron-europe.com> domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii), as the WHOIS information named "Fred Wallace" as registrant of the disputed domain name). Complainant provides evidence showing that Respondent fails to use the <abbvie-support.com> domain name for a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use as the domain name does not resolve to any active content. The Panel finds that constitutes evidence that Respondent has no rights under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). See Teachers Ins. and Annuity Ass'n of Am. V. Wreaks Commc'ns Group (WIPO June 15, 2006) ("passive holding does not constitute 'legitimate non-commercial or fair use'"). The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Registration and Use in Bad Faith Complainant argues that Respondent's failure to make an active use of the <abbvie-support.com> domain name constitutes bad faith. The Panel agrees and finds bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Kohl's Illinois, Inc. v. c/o kohlsdepartmentstore.com; c/o khols.com, FA 1442950 (Forum June 7, 2012) ("Respondent's failure to make an active use of the disputed domain name s demonstrates bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii)). Complainant also claims that Respondent registered the <abbvie-support.com> domain name with knowledge of Complainant's rights in the ABBVIE mark. The Panel agrees and finds that Respondent registered the disputed domain names with full knowledge of Complainant's rights, demonstrating further bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Minicards Vennootschap Onder FIrma Amsterdam v. Moscow Studios, FA 1031703 (Forum Sept. 5, 2007) (holding that respondent registered a domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) after concluding that respondent "actual knowledge of Complainant's mark when registering the disputed domain name"). The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). DECISION Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED. Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <abbvie-support.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Sandra J. Franklin, Panelist Dated: February 24, 2026 Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page. Click Here to return to our Home Page

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

Beyond the decision

What Westmore sees around abbvie-support.com

The decision is only the record. Westmore connects it to the cases, authorities, panelists, parties and domain evidence surrounding it.

Connected to Westmore UDRP Intelligence
116,042 decisions · citations · panelists · parties · domain history
Eleanor · UDRP intelligence
Ask Eleanor about this decision
Ask Eleanor about this decision

A short, grounded explanation drawn only from this decision's record — not legal advice or a prediction.

Unlocking Eleanor for this case uses 1 of your complimentary Intelligence unlocks· 3 remaining

Grounded in the Westmore record for this decision. Research/informational only — not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome.

Westmore Professional · Unlock the intelligence

The decision is only the beginning.

You've seen what happened. Now discover the deeper intelligence behind the case, the panelist, the parties and the authorities that matter.

Citation Intelligence
How this decision is cited and treated across the corpus.
Panelist Intelligence
The panel's tendencies, outcomes and reasoning patterns.
Domain History
Ownership chronology — creation vs. respondent acquisition.
Opposing-Party Research
Complainant, counsel and portfolio context.
Independent Case Review
Eleanor challenges your filing before the other side does.
Professional Matters
Open, research and manage matters end to end.
$395/month
Unlock Westmore Professional Annual & firm seats available · cancel anytime
Take the next step
Westmore UDRP · find the right service

Westmore UDRP records draw on FORUM-indexed decisions and are provided for research and informational purposes only. Not legal advice, a clearance opinion, or a prediction of any outcome.

Essential cookies only. Nothing is sold or shared.