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
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
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
Complainant contends that the Domain Name is identical or at least confusingly similar to its trademark MAYBELLINE and that the Domain Name reproduces its trademark in its entirety with the adjunction of the ccTLD <.tv>. ...It is equally clear that Complainant has protectable rights in the MAYBELLINE trademark and that the Domain Name is either identical or confusingly similar to the said trademark.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the ground is made out.
B. ...
2011-02-28 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has provided evidence of ownership of several trademark registrations for WELLINGTON MANAGEMENT, such as the Community Trademark Registration No. 8544819, registered on February 17, 2010, in class 36; the U.S. ...In view of the above, the Panel finds that the Complainant has proven that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights in accordance with paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2010-10-15 - Case Details
For all of these reasons, the disputed domain name is not confusingly similar to the Trade Marks.
The Respondent is using the disputed domain name legitimately, in respect of the Website which provides paid links to third party websites. ...UDRP panels have consistently held that domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark for purposes of the Policy “when the domain name includes the trade mark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name” (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2010-12-20 - Case Details
These three elements are considered below.
Identical or Confusingly Similar to Trademark
The Panel has reviewed the documentary evidence provided by the Complainant
regarding its rights in the trademark RESEARCH IN MOTION and finds that the
Complainant has satisfactorily shown that it owns such rights.
...D2000-1571,
the panel held: "In determining whether a Domain Name is confusingly similar
to a trademark, the intention of the Domain Name registrant is irrelevant. It
is the objective likelihood of confusion that must be assessed."
...
2001-06-25 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Policy - Paragraph 4(a)(i) - Domain Name Identical or Confusingly Similar to Complainant’s Marks
The Complainant clearly has rights in the FAMITSU trademark and service mark, and, apart from the generic suffix <.net>, the domain name is identical to that mark.
...In those circumstances, the Panel has no difficulty in finding that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to trademarks or service marks in which the Complainant has rights, and that the Complainant has sufficiently proved the matters required to be proved under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2002-03-01 - Case Details
c) Complainant’s Proof
(i) Domain Name Identical or Confusingly Similar to Trademark
Complainant has proven that it is the owner of trademark rights in the marks
TAMPA BAY BUSINESS and TAMPA BAY BUSINESS JOURNAL.
...That function establishes
it as a trademark at common law.
The Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered mark TAMPA
BAY BUSINESS, even if Complainant did not separately own rights to the mark
TAMPA BAY BUSINESS JOURNAL (which it does, as discussed below). ...
2001-09-10 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which it has rights.
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name.
...Identical or Confusingly Similar
There is no dispute between the parties that the Complainant has rights in the trade mark Montagut.
...
2002-02-01 - Case Details
Whether Respondent had a good faith belief that Complainant’s marks were generic terms is not relevant to the question whether Respondent has registered domain names that are confusingly similar to marks in which Complainant has rights.
The Panel determines that the domain names and are confusingly similar to Complainant’s "AOL" and "AOL.COM" marks. ...The Panel determines that the disputed domain names and are confusingly similar to Complainant’s "AOL" and "AOL.COM" marks within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ...
2001-06-28 - Case Details
On the basis of these circumstances, Complainant alleges that the domain name is obviously identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark "Kanzleramt" as the addition of ".biz" is an insignificant distinction that does not remove the likelihood for confusion.
...i) of the Policy, to prove that the domain name at issue is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights.
The domain name at issue is .
...
2002-08-28 - Case Details
i) Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has furnished prima facie evidence that it is the owner of a number of trade marks and pending trade mark applications for "Color Workshop" and "Colour Workshop" as set out above, and accordingly has rights in the same.
...Decision
The Panel concludes (a) that the Domain Name is identical with and confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade marks, (b) that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name and (c) that Respondent registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith. ...
2002-09-13 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant’s contentions may be summarised as follows:-
JMC is its registered trade mark, it operates in the field of air travel and in that context the Domain Name is confusingly similar to its trade mark/service mark JMC.
The Respondent registered the Domain Name some time after the Complainant commenced use of its trade mark JMC. ...Identical or confusing similarity
The Respondent does not appear to contest the Complainant’s assertion that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in respect of which it has rights. Nor could it do so given that the Domain Name is intended to be a reference to the Complainant and/or its products. ...
2001-01-29 - Case Details
Complainant
AutoNation asserts that (i) the three contested domain names are identical or confusingly similar to trademarks or service marks in which it has rights; (ii) Mr. Schaefer has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names; and (iii) that the domain names were registered and are being used by Mr. ...Summary
AutoNation has provided ample evidence to meet all three elements required to prevail under the Policy, Paragraph 4(a): (i) the disputed domain names are identical and/or confusingly similar to service marks in which AutoNation has rights; (ii) Mr. Schaefer has not demonstrated his rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names or any corresponding name or mark; and (iii) Mr. ...
2001-05-01 - Case Details
a) Identical or confusingly similar
The Complainant contends that it has numerous registrations of the trademark "Philips". ...D2000-1493), where the domain name <4microsoft2000.com> was found to be confusingly similar with the trademark "Microsoft".
See: Digital City, Inc. v. Smalldomain (D2000-1283), at p.6....
2001-05-17 - Case Details
The Complainant asserts that the domain name "microsofthealth.com" is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s MICROSOFT mark since it incorporates the MICROSOFT mark, as well as the address for the Complainant’s official Web site at "microsoft.com". ...Decision
The Panelist concludes that: (i) the domain name in issue is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark; (ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name; and (iii) the Respondent registered and has used the domain name in bad faith. ...
2001-04-23 - Case Details
Therefore, the domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark ADSTAR. See, inter alia, WIPO panel decisions GA Modefine SA v. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel believes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s ADSTAR trademarks. ...
2004-07-02 - Case Details