Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
(i) Identical or confusingly similar
Complainant states that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to trademarks in which Complainant has rights. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that Complainant has demonstrated it has well-established rights in its long-standing and well-known ALLIANZ trademarks, both through registration and widespread use. ...
2021-05-26 - Case Details
Therefore, the case has to be decided on the merits.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has shown that it has registered rights in the Trade Marks. The Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trade Marks as it incorporates FACEBOOK, of which the Trade Marks consist, in its entirety. ...Therefore, the Panel finds that the Domain Names are confusingly similar to the Trade Marks in which the Complainant has rights.
C. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Under paragraph 4(c) of the Policy, the second element a complainant has to prove is that a respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in a domain name. ...
2021-09-20 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s TOGG marks.
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. ...Therefore, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights. The Complainant has satisfied the first element in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
...
2021-09-15 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that:
(a) The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to its trade marks. The disputed domain names wholly incorporate the IQOS trade mark and the HEETS trade mark, and the addition of the term “.com” in the disputed domain names does not eliminate the overall notion that the designations are connected to the trade marks and the likelihood of confusion that the disputed domain names and the trade marks are associated;
(b) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the disputed domain names and are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade marks. ...
2021-03-29 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
(i) Identical or confusingly similar
Complainant notes that the registration of its earlier trademark pre-dates the registration of the Domain Name by more than 24 years. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that Complainant has established rights in its long-standing and registered trademark, ARNOLD CLARK. ...
2021-03-23 - Case Details
Complainant
According to the Complainant, the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Trade Marks, as it incorporates SLUSH PUPPIE in its entirety and differs from the Trade Marks only in that it adds the country code Top-Level Domain (“ccTLD”) “.nl” and removes the space between the terms “slush” and “puppie”. ...The Respondent has not denied that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trade Marks. For completeness’ sake, the Panel notes that the Domain Name incorporates the mark SLUSH PUPPIE, of which the Trade Marks consist, in its entirety (see WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7), while the ccTLD “.nl” is typically disregarded under the confusing similarity test, since it is a technical registration requirement (see WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.11).
...
2021-04-14 - Case Details
D2002-0683; and Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. v. null John Zuccarini, Country Walk,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0487).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has filed evidence showing that it owns registrations for the trademark GENZYME in multiple classes, which cover pharmaceutical products and services.
...Therefore, the disputed domain name is considered confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark (see sections 1.7 and 1.8 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), see also Alfred Dunhill, Inc. v. ...
2021-03-17 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant relies on the European Union trademark registration No. 002211159 for, filed on April 17, 2001 and registered on February 28, 2014, in international classes 16, 39, 41, and 42.
...Therefore, the Panel finds that the Complainant has proven that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has established rights according to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2021-08-27 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the INSTA trademark, because the combination “instognita” is a reference to the INSTA trademark and the term “incognito”, and the letters “inst” as the leading element of the disputed domain name make the INSTA trademark sufficiently recognizable in the disputed domain name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has provided evidence and has thus established its rights in the INSTA trademark.
...
2021-06-02 - Case Details
C. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has provided evidence of its registrations in relation to the PET PLAN Mark in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. ...The Panel therefore finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s PET PLAN Mark.
Therefore, the Panel finds that paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy is satisfied in favour of the Complainant.
...
2020-12-09 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Based on the evidence presented, the Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the OANDA trademark.
...Therefore, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights. The Complainant has satisfied the first element in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
...
2021-01-06 - Case Details
It first argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the earlier GEICO trade mark registrations. The Complainant states that the disputed domain name incorporates the Complainant’s trade mark GEICO in its entirety. ...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the GEICO trade marks. The disputed domain name contains the Complainant’s trade mark GEICO in its entirety and only differs in the number 9 at its ending. ...
2020-11-17 - Case Details
Namely, the Complainant must prove that:
(i) the Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (paragraph 4(a)(i)); and
(ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Names (paragraph 4(a)(ii)); and
(iii) the Domain Names have been registered and is being used in bad faith (paragraph 4(a)(iii)).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
6.2 The Complainant has demonstrated that it is the owner of registered trade mark rights for ARGUS. ...
2021-02-05 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has rights to a trademark or service mark as reflected in the Trademark.
A comparison between the Disputed Domain Name and the Trademark shows that the Disputed Domain Name can be considered as confusingly similar to the Trademark, because the Trademark is clearly recognizable within the Disputed Domain Name to which the term “socodis” has been added.
...
2020-11-05 - Case Details
See WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 1.7. The Doman Name is confusingly similar to the claimed EVERGREEN REVIEW mark, lacking only the unpronounced space between words (which cannot be included in the Domain Name System for technical reasons), and the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com” is disregarded as a standard registration requirement. ...This example could encompass PPC advertising using a domain name confusingly similar to a trademark.
The examples given in paragraph 4(b) are not exclusive, and the Complainant suggests that the Respondent, in league with the “disgruntled” former publisher Ms. ...
2020-11-05 - Case Details
On the basis of the arguments and evidence introduced by the Complainant, the Panel concludes as follows:
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in MILLIMAN by virtue of its use and registration of the same as a trade mark.
...Consequently, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark.
Accordingly, the Complainant has satisfied the requirements of the first element under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
...
2020-09-14 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is established case law that the country code Top-Level domain “.nl” may be disregarded in assessing the similarity between the Trademarks on the one hand, and the disputed domain name on the other hand (see, e.g., Roompot Recreatie Beheer B.V. v. ...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Trademarks for which reason the requirement of article 2.1.a of the Regulations has been met.
...
2020-09-23 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that:
(1) The disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks because they contain 인스타 (the Korean transliteration of “insta”) or INSTA mark in its entirety. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name <인스타고수.com> (xn--299ak61b7lao3nqon.com) incorporates the Complainant’s 인스타 trademark in its entirety with the addition of the dictionary term “고수” (English transliteration “gosu”). ...
2020-10-22 - Case Details
In the circumstances, there is no reason for the default rule under the Rules not to apply.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The first element that the Complainant must establish is that the disputed domain name is identical with, or confusingly similar to, the Complainant’s trademark rights.
There are two parts to this inquiry: the Complainant must demonstrate that it has rights in a trademark and, if so, the disputed domain name must be shown to be identical or confusingly similar to the trademark.
The Complainant has proven ownership of the registered trademark in Switzerland for PLAY SUISSE referred to in section 4 above.
...
2020-10-12 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the trademark CORIOLISS in which the Complainant has rights since November 20, 2018, as they both reproduce the trademark in its entirety with the mere addition of the geographical indicator “Europe" in one of the two cases and of the generic Top-Level domain (“gTLD) “.com” in both cases.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has established rights over the trademark CORIOLISS based on the trademark registrations cited under section 4 above and the Trademark Assignment Deed signed with the Respondents on November 20, 2018, copy of which is submitted as Annex 2 to the Complaint.
...
2020-02-14 - Case Details