Discussion and Findings
A. Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant is a provider of online computer games and related services and is the owner of the STAR STABLE registered trademark in various jurisdictions including in the United States and Europe where it was registered for the first time in 2010 for computer games.
...The addition of the term “hack” and a gTLD does not serve to distinguish the Domain Name from the Complainant’s STAR STABLE mark and the Panellist finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant has rights under the first limb of the Policy.
B. ...
2016-09-05 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Complainant must prove that each of the following three elements is present:
(i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark; 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.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name fully incorporates the Complainant’s well established ROYAL COPENHAGEN Marks and is identical to such marks.
...
2016-10-06 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainants clearly hold rights, through widespread registration and longstanding use, in the marks TITAN and TITAN GARAGES. The Panel also finds the Domain Name to be confusingly similar to the mark, as it incorporates the TITAN GARAGES mark (minus the “s”) and adds the phrase “beware of.” ...
2016-11-08 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
As set out above there is considerable evidence of the Complainant as the owner of trademarks incorporating REGENERON which precede the date of registration of the disputed domain names.
...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant relies upon the following:
1. ...
2016-11-25 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark and trade name LA REDOUTE, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name and the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant holds worldwide trademark registrations for the LA REDOUTE trademark. ...
2016-11-24 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its STAEDTLER mark because the disputed domain name incorporates the STAEDTLER mark in its entirety, with only the addition of the generic country name "india" and the generic Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") ".com".
...The Panel further finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the STAEDTLER mark because it incorporates the entirety of the trademark. The addition of the geographically descriptive term "india" and the gTLD ".com" do not ameliorate the entire reproduction of the STAEDTLER mark.
...
2016-11-22 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant's contentions may be summarised as follows:
(i) The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trade mark because it combines the trade mark WOLFORD with the geographic term "Kobenhavn". ...Accordingly the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trade mark in which the Complainant has clearly established its rights.
...
2017-10-03 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainant has rights in the marks CASINO DE MONACO, MONACOBET, MONACOPOKER, and MONACOGAMING through registration and use. The Domain Names are confusingly similar to these marks, since they incorporate a dominant feature of the marks, i.e., “monaco”, and add the number “88,” which is suggestive of luck, and a suffix of letters either suggestive of Europe (“euro”) or otherwise of little meaning.
...
2017-09-25 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainant has rights in the mark DEWALT through registration and use. The Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant's mark, since it incorporates the mark DEWALT in its entirety. The addition of the term "tools" is probably the most descriptive term that could conceivably apply to Complainant's products.
...
2017-10-24 - Case Details
Those elements are:
(i) that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(ii) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and
(iii) that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Even in a case where the Respondent has failed to file a Response, it is still necessary for the Complainant to prove that all three of the above elements are present.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established that it filed a US trademark application for RAPANOFAL on September 22, 2016, and received a Notice of Allowance of that trademark on May 2, 2017. ...
2017-06-27 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends principally that: (i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant has rights; (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. ...Turning to the merits, in order to prevail, the Complainant must satisfy each of the three elements of Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to ROLAND GARROS, a mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...
2017-02-09 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its ACTELION trademark, containing the Complainant's mark in its entirety, with the mere addition of the descriptive or non-distinctive words "clinical research".
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well established in decisions under the UDRP that the generic Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") (e.g., ".com", ".info", ".net", ".org") may typically be considered irrelevant in assessing confusing similarity between a trademark and a disputed domain name. ...
2017-02-09 - Case Details
Addition of generic terms such as “cheap”, “sale” and “online” are descriptive and so do not impact the comparison of the conflicting signs. The Domain Names are clearly confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark HUGO BOSS.
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests to the name HUGO BOSS which is the name of the Complainant’s company. ...Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Domain Names are confusingly similar for the purpose to a mark in which the Complainants have rights.
D. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Respondent has not answered this Complaint and has not provided any legitimate reason why he should be able to use the Complainants’ mark in the Domain Names. ...
2017-02-02 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Mark, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name and that the Respondent registered and is using the Domain Name in bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has uncontested rights in the Mark, by virtue of its trademark registrations. ...
2017-04-13 - Case Details
Under these circumstances, the Panel finds it proper and fair to render this decision in English.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated with supporting evidence that it holds trademark registrations for MICHELIN in various jurisdictions, including in the Republic of Korea. ...Further, there is no specific meaning attached to “michelin”, nor “michelins”. Accordingly, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.
For the reasons mentioned above, the Panel finds that the first element has been established.
...
2017-04-07 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainants allege that the disputed domain name is identical with or confusingly similar to a trademark in which they have rights, as the disputed domain name contains the trademark BIGOTTI in its entirety, with no addition other than the generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) indicator “.com”.
...Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainants have satisfied the Panel that they have trademark rights in their BIGOTTI trademark for the purposes of these proceedings.
...
2017-04-03 - Case Details
SINGAPORE POOLS is a well-known mark in Singapore in which the Complainant owns substantial reputation and goodwill.
The Domain Name is confusingly similar and/or identical to the complainant's SINGAPORE POOLS trade mark in that it contains SINGAPORE POOLS in its entirety. ...Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant, established in 1968, runs a well-known betting related service in Singapore and is the owner of registered trademarks there for SINGAPORE POOLS (plus logo) for its services.
...
2016-12-15 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Trade Mark, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, and the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...Having considered all the matters above, the Panel determines under paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that the language of the proceeding shall be English.
6.2 Substantive Elements of the Policy
The Complainant must prove each of the three elements in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy in order to prevail.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the Trade Mark acquired through use and registration.
...
2016-03-03 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to the Trade Mark, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names, and the disputed domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith.
...Having considered all the matters above, the Panel determines under paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that the language of the proceeding shall be English.
6.2 Substantive Elements of the Policy
The Complainant must prove each of the three elements in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy in order to prevail.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the Trade Mark acquired through use and registration.
...
2016-01-14 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainants contend that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which they have rights because it contains their NOMURA trademark in its entirety and adds to it the word “Labuan”. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainants have rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Respondent has not been authorized by the Complainants to use their NOMURA trademark. ...
2016-01-11 - Case Details