A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This element consists of two parts: first, does the Complainant have rights in a relevant trademark and, second, is the disputed domain name identical or confusingly similar to that trademark.
...Thus, it is well established that such element may be disregarded when assessing whether a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark. Proactiva Medio Ambiente, S.A. v. Proactiva,
WIPO Case No. D2012-0182.
...
2014-09-18 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has provided evidence demonstrating ownership of a registration of the Mark LINODE. ...Complainant further contends that the Disputed Domain Name is identical with and confusingly similar to the Mark pursuant to the Policy paragraph 4(a)(i). Respondent has not contested the assertions by Complaint that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Mark.
...
2014-11-03 - Case Details
D2005-1190 (referring to intentional misspellings as “typosquatting”, which “has consistently been regarded as creating domain names confusingly similar to the relevant mark” and ordering transfer of domain name to complainant).
The Complainant referred to the irrelevance of a generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) name such as “.com” when determining whether a disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a protected mark.
...However, the Complainant must still support its allegations with evidence to succeed in a UDRP proceeding.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name, , is confusingly similar to the MARLBORO trademarks to which the Complainant has rights. ...
2016-09-01 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant does have registered trademark rights in the mark BAM FUTURA by virtue of its Trademark Registrations, including those listed in paragraph 4 of this decision.
...Furthermore, the Panel is prepared to find that the registration and use of a confusingly similar domain name in association with a website that offers links to other parties as a pay-per-click website is not evidence of a bona fide offering of goods and services as defined under the Policy. ...
2015-08-11 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has shown that it has rights in both the SSS and ATLANTIC SOUTHERN INSURANCE marks. ...D2001-0381 (, , and are confusingly similar to Wall Street Journal mark).
Further, in making an inquiry as to whether a trademark is identical or confusingly similar to a domain name, the Top-Level Domain, in this case “.net,” may be disregarded. ...
2016-04-01 - Case Details
Complainant
To summarize the Complaint, the Complainant is the owner of multiple registrations for the trademark WINDSTAR in respect of providing cruise services. The Domain Name is confusingly similar to the trademark owned by the Complainant. Therefore, the Domain Name could be considered virtually identical and/or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfactorily proven that it has registered trademark rights for WINDSTAR.
...
2017-04-11 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has exhibited a copy of its United States BOOT BARN trademark registration. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2026-03-13 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its
trademark MITTAL. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2026-02-03 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2026-02-23 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2025-01-28 - Case Details
Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC
/ Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico, WIPO Case No. D2019-1741 (finding confusingly similar to CVS); Accenture Global Services Limited v. Carolina Rodrigues, WIPO
Case No. D2021-1456 (finding confusingly similar to ACCENTURE); and
Comerica Bank v. ...Therefore, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the trademark EQUIFAX in which
the Complainant has rights, satisfying the condition of the Policy, paragraph 4(a)(i).
...
2022-05-04 - Case Details
Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the FASHION NOVA Marks.
Complainant also contends that Respondent’s use of the term “claim” before “fashion” and “nova” in the
disputed domain name is a non-material difference and that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar
and/or virtually identical to the FASHION NOVA Marks.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-08-03 - Case Details
page 3
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the Complainant to show that the disputed domain name is identical
or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-12-09 - Case Details
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2002/d2002-1064.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-1425.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0009.html
page 3
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel agrees with Complainant’s allegation that the disputed domain name is
confusingly similar to Complainant’s KIMLEY-HORN marks.
...The Panel therefore rules that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s marks.
See, e.g., WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition, section 1.9
(“WIPO Overview 3.0”) (domain names that consist of common, obvious, or intentional misspellings of
trademarks are considered by panels to be confusingly similar to the relevant marks).
...
2022-12-07 - Case Details
The third element a complainant must establish
is that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires that the Complainant establish that the disputed domain name is
identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...See section 1.8 of the WIPO Overview 3.0.
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark as it includes the
Complainant’s trademark entirely combined with the term “store”. ...
2022-12-29 - Case Details
Thus, it is well
established that such element may typically be disregarded when assessing whether a domain name is
identical or confusingly similar to a trademark.
As a result, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
trademark.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2023-02-14 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, the Complainants must first of all establish rights in a trademark
or service mark and secondly establish that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a
trademark in which the Complainants have rights.
...Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainants’ trademark.
B. Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. ...
2022-08-11 - Case Details
Hence, the Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s J. CREW and J. CREW REWARDS trademarks.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied the requirement under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...The Panel is further convinced that the Respondent deliberately registered a domain name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark in order to create confusion among Internet users for illegitimate and bad faith purposes. ...
2021-08-11 - Case Details
The Panel further finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered DRESS BARN trademark. As stated at section 1.9 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, where the relevant disputed domain name consists of a common, obvious, or intentional misspelling of a trademark is considered to be confusingly similar, if the disputed domain name contains sufficiently recognizable aspects of the relevant trademark.
In the present case, the Panel notes that disputed domain name incorporates a confusingly similar misspelling of the Complainant’s DRESS BARN trademark by replacing the letter “a” by the adjacent keyboard letter “z”.
...
2021-08-09 - Case Details
Marketing Total S.A.,
WIPO Case No. D2007-0451.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
To satisfy this element, Complainants must establish that they have rights to a trademark or service mark and that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to such mark. ...Respondent has not rebutted Complainants’ contention that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainants’ mark.
The Panel finds that Complainants have rights to the KBR mark and that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainants’ mark. ...
2011-03-14 - Case Details