International Electronic Communications Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0270.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SILVERCREEK mark, in which the Complainant has demonstrated rights. ...The Respondent notwithstanding has registered the disputed domain name, which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SILVERCREEK mark, and is using the disputed domain name with a landing page featuring advertising links related to real estate. ...
2018-06-19 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is undisputed that Complainants have rights over the Trademarks.
Since the addition of a gTLD suffix after a domain name is technically required, it is well established that such element may be disregarded where assessing whether a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark.5 As set forth in the Complaint, each of the disputed domain names contains one of the Trademarks in its entirety, although with other terms or characters; it is clear to this Panel that the central element in each of the disputed domain names is one of the Trademarks, and thus the addition of other terms or characters in the disputed domain names does not avoid confusing similarity. Based on the aforesaid, it is clear that each disputed domain name is confusingly similar to one of those Trademarks.
Thus this Panel finds that Complainants have satisfied paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2018-10-17 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant contends as follows:
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's PETPLAN trademarks. By virtue of its various registrations, Complainant is the owner of the PETPLAN marks, which the disputed domain name captures in its entirety, and simply adding the generic term "perfect".
...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's mark PETPLAN.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Complainant contends that Respondent is not sponsored by or affiliated with Complainant in any way. ...
2018-07-11 - Case Details
Therefore, the Panel believes that the Respondent has sufficient knowledge to follow and to contribute to the proceedings in English language.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has established trademark rights in the trademark VOLKSWAGEN. ...Where a domain name incorporates a complainant’s mark, this is sufficient to establish that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar for purposes of the Policy (see Sportsdirect.com Retail Limited v. Nicole Missell and Dreamless Brand,
WIPO Case No. ...
2018-07-04 - Case Details
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established that it is the owner of a United States trademark for a combined design and stylized word mark TENICA. ...
2019-01-31 - Case Details
Complainant
First, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights on the following grounds:
(1) The Complainant is the registered proprietor an international portfolio of registered trade marks for the mark KAREN MILLEN...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Panel finds for the Complainant on the first part of the test.
...
2011-09-02 - Case Details
Complainant
First, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights on the following grounds:
(1) The Complainant is the registered proprietor an international portfolio of registered trade marks for the mark KAREN MILLEN...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names and are confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Panel finds for the Complainant on the first part of the test.
...
2011-09-02 - Case Details
In Complainant’s view, the Domain Name is identical and confusingly similar to its LEGO trademark and the addition of the suffix “price” does not mitigate the confusion and will have no impact on the overall impression of the Domain Name, as the dominant part of the Domain Name is LEGO. ...“Although a panel may draw appropriate inferences from a respondent’s default (e.g., to regard factual allegations which are not inherently implausible as being true), paragraph 4 of the UDRP requires the complainant to support its assertions with actual evidence in order to succeed in a UDRP proceeding.”4
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
To satisfy the first UDRP element, a domain name must be “identical or confusingly similar” to a trademark, in which a complainant has rights. ...
2011-08-29 - Case Details
These elements are that:
(i) respondent’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which complainant has rights; and
(ii) respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii) respondent’s domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...The Panel determines that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's LILLY CARES trademark within the meaning of the Policy.
Complainant has established that it has rights in the LILLY and LILLY CARES trademarks and that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the LILLY CARES trademark.
...
2011-07-14 - Case Details
The disputed domain name is so identical or at least confusingly similar with Complainant’s trademarks, Respondent could not reasonably pretend he was attempting to engage in a legitimate activity.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This Panel finds that Respondent’s domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s well-known GEMEY and MAYBELLINE trademarks. ...
2011-07-04 - Case Details
Therefore, the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s Trademark and the requirement under section 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been satisfied.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant is owner of the trademark LEASEWEB which is undisputedly part of the disputed domain name. ...
2012-01-19 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is identical and confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. The Domain Name contains a word which is identical to the word “Barclays” in which the Complainant has common law rights and for which the Complainant has registered trademarks.
...On these grounds, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant claims that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name, and provides certain arguments in this regard. ...
2011-12-02 - Case Details
The first element is that the “domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights”. Policy, paragraph 4(a)(i). ...Policy, paragraph 4(a)(iii).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the Complainant establishes that the disputed domain name is “identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights”. ...
2014-11-26 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant’s contentions could be summarized as follows:
(i) The Disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Disputed Domain Names incorporate the Complainant’s GOYARD trademark in its entirety. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark and the condition of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been fulfilled.
...
2013-05-13 - Case Details
The Panel sees no reason not to proceed to a decision in this case.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has produced satisfactory evidence of its rights in the trademark EDINGURGH ACADEMY. ...The Panel finds the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar and identical to the Complainant’s trademark within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2013-02-11 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name incorporates entirely, and is confusingly similar to, the trademark GTA in which the Complainant has rights. The disputed domain name differs from the trademark GTA by the addition of the number “5”, which the Complainant says is meant to signify the game GTA:V. ...The Panel finds the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2013-05-01 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant makes the following submissions.
Identical or Confusingly Similar
Elsa Schiaparelli was an Italian fashion designer. Nowadays she is a fashion icon whose creations are well-known around the world. ...The Complainant bears the onus of proving these elements.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy provides that the Complainant must establish that the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Trade Marks.
...
2012-05-31 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. The reasons are as follows:
1. ...The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its LAGARDERE trademark because the disputed domain name puts into attack position the term “lagardere” particularly in light of the fact that the second word “publicite” is descriptive which means “advertising” in English.
4. ...
2012-05-21 - Case Details
D2012-1213).
C. Domain Name is Identical or Confusingly Similar
As appears from the factual background, the Complainant has set out details of the extent to which it carries on business, and holds trademark registrations for XENICAL, in over 100 countries.
...The fact that the word mark has been incorporated entirely into the Domain Name is sufficient to establish that it is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's registered mark (Quixtar Investments Inc v. Dennis Hoffmann,
WIPO Case No. ...
2012-09-10 - Case Details
Complainant
First, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights on the following grounds:
(1) The Complainant is the registered proprietor an international portfolio of registered trade marks for the mark KAREN MILLEN...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Panel finds for the Complainant on the first part of the test.
...
2012-08-23 - Case Details