As such, the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trademark.
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant must demonstrate that it has rights in a trademark or service mark and, if so, the Domain Name must be shown to be identical or confusingly similar to that mark.
...
2021-01-13 - Case Details
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, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s IBM Mark.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the first element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been met by the Complainant.
...
2021-02-02 - Case Details
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. ...D2012-0182. Thus, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s IBM Mark.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the first element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been met by the Complainant.
...
2021-02-02 - Case Details
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. ...Further, the registration of a domain name that is confusingly similar to a trademark by an entity that has no relationship to that mark may be evidence of opportunistic bad faith. ...
2020-08-11 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name, , is confusingly similar to its VERIZON trademark. Certainly, the disputed domain name contains the mark in full. ...Consequently, the Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. See, Accor v. WhoisGuard, Inc. / Bill Bro,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-03-29 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires a two-fold inquiry, a threshold investigation into whether a complainant has rights in a trademark, followed by an assessment of whether the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to that trademark. ...First, the registration of a domain name that is confusingly similar to a trademark by an entity that has no relationship to that mark may be sufficient evidence of opportunistic bad faith. ...
2020-05-12 - Case Details
The Respondent acted with opportunistic bad faith by registering a domain name that is confusingly similar to the Complainants’ well-recognized trademark. The Respondent’s lack of legitimate interests in the disputed domain name by itself also indicates bad faith. ...Therefore, the Panel has decided that the language of the proceeding shall be English and shall proceed with a decision in English.
6.2 Substantive Issues
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Under the first element of the Policy, a complainant must prove that a disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights (paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).
...
2020-05-18 - Case Details
The Respondent’s passive nonuse of the disputed domain name, which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s famous service mark, constitutes bad faith registration and use under the Policy. ...D2004-0741 (finding to be confusingly similar to the GTA mark).
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has succeeded in showing that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...
2020-04-07 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant, under the first requirement of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, needs to establish that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark or a service mark in which it has rights.
...As regards the trademark CVS, the Panel finds that it is confusingly similar to the disputed domain name, as the trademark is entirely included in the disputed domain name. ...
2020-11-13 - Case Details
The addition of the gTLD is not relevant in considering whether the disputed domain name, if not identical to the trademark, is at least confusingly similar to that mark. As a result, the Panel determines that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s BULGARI trademark. ...D2013-0855 (finding to be confusingly similar to the MONTBLANC marks); Vibram S.p.A. v. Huang Xiaoming,
WIPO Case No. D2010-1310 (finding to be confusingly similar to the VIBRAM mark); and G4S Plc v. ...
2019-08-07 - Case Details
Therefore, the Domain Name is phonetically identical and confusingly similar to the Complainant’s well-known Trademark.
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name. ...In light of the foregoing, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trademark.
Therefore, the Panel is satisfied that the first element of the Policy is met.
...
2021-03-05 - Case Details
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, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s IBM Mark.
Accordingly, the first element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been met by the Complainant.
...
2020-01-13 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, there are two requirements which the Complainant must establish, first that it has rights in a trademark or service mark, and second that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark or service mark.
...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s JCDECAUX trademark and that requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2019-11-15 - Case Details
The Panel holds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the above trademarks. The disputed domain names, as registered by the Respondent, incorporate the WAL-MART and WALMART trademarks. ...For the foregoing reasons, the Panel decides that the contested domain names and are confusingly similar to Complainant's trademarks WAL-MART and WALMART in the sense of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2009-12-23 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. Complainant bases this allegation entirely upon the two USPTO registrations for the mark SUBWAY evidence of which is annexed to the Complaint.
...To conclude that the domain name has been shown on the limited pleadings submitted to be identical or confusingly similar to the mark SUBWAY requires a leap that this Panel is not comfortable making.
Inasmuch as the Panel finds that Complainant has failed in these proceedings to discharge its burden of establishing that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights, it is unnecessary to consider whether the second and third elements of the Policy have been met in the circumstances of this case.
7. ...
2010-04-12 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Two separate issues fall for consideration. (1) Does the Complainant have rights in the marks and (2) are the domain names identical or confusingly similar to any such marks. ...The Complainant argues in its own words that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its marks for the following reasons:
“The domain names currently used by Respondents are confusingly similar to Complainant’s famous WRANGLER trademarks. ...
2007-06-21 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Under Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy Complainant must show that the domain names at issue are “identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights”.
...D2006-0694 (July 24, 2006),
and the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to
Complainant’s mark. A disclaimer such as that used by Respondent does
not alter the fact that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly
similar to Complainant’s mark. ...
2006-12-05 - Case Details
Under paragraph 15(a) of the Rules, this Panel must “decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable”.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, a complainant must prove that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights.
...Secondly, the disputed domain name, which wholly incorporates Complainant’s trademark VALIUM is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark VALIUM.
It is well established that the specific top level of a domain name such as “.com”, “.org” or “.net” does not affect the domain name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical or confusingly similar (See eBay Inc. v. ...
2007-12-21 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
According to the Complainant, its rights in the well known LEXAPRO mark are strong. ...The Panel finds that the Respondent has capitalized on Complainant’s trademark by registering and using as a domain name a name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, see Volvo Trademark Holding AB v. Unasi, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2007-09-14 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant’s marks are registered throughout the world. The Complainant owns numerous marks using “MONEYCENTRAL”. The domain name wholly incorporates Complainant’s distinctive marks and as such creates sufficient similarity to be confusingly similar (see paragraph 4(a) of the Policy).
Therefore, the Panel finds that the domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s marks pursuant to the Policy paragraph 4(a)(i).
...
2005-07-28 - Case Details