page 4
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-12-26 - Case Details
”
- The Disputed Domain Name is available for purchase via GoDaddy.
5. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
5. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
6. Decision...
2024-12-30 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.2.1 states that registration is prima facie evidence of Complainant having
enforceable rights in the ZOCDOC Mark.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2025-01-15 - Case Details
Further, according to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules, the Panel may draw such inferences from
Respondent's failure to submit a Response as it considers appropriate.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
First, it is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2025-02-05 - Case Details
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 4
6.2. Substantive Issues
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-12-17 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...The Panel also concludes that the Domain Name is confusingly
similar to that mark. The Domain Name entirely incorporates the mark and inserts a hyphen between the
words. ...
2025-01-20 - Case Details
Nevertheless, the Panel
notes that the Respondent’s informal Chinese communications have been fully considered.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-08-14 - Case Details
Further, according to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules, the Panel may draw such inferences from the
Respondent’s failure to submit a substantive response as it considers appropriate.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-08-06 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-06-26 - Case Details
The Panel will therefore proceed to analyze whether the three elements of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy are
satisfied.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-07-19 - Case Details
Panels have consistently found that the mere registration of a
domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a famous or widely-known trademark by an unaffiliated
entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-08-02 - Case Details
Respondent
5.7 No formal response was filed by the Respondent in the present proceeding, although it did send an
email as set out in the Procedural History section of this decision.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
6.1 It is generally accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-07-30 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainant holds rights in the mark DESCON through registration and use
demonstrated in the record. The Panel also concludes that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to
Complainant’s mark. The Domain Name entirely incorporates the DESCON mark, and adds the term
“automation.” ...
2024-07-26 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-07-02 - Case Details
The entirety of the mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed domain
name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7.
Although the addition of other terms (here, “official”) may bear on assessment of the second and third
elements, the Panel finds the addition of such term does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity between
the disputed domain name and the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...Discussion and Findings
Consent to Remedy – Preliminary Issue
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2025-03-20 - Case Details
Having considered all the matters above, the Panel determines pursuant to paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that
the language of the proceeding shall be English.
C. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Accordingly,
based on its review of the specific Trade Mark and domain name at issue in this matter, the disputed domain
name is confusingly similar to the Trade Mark for the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.0, section
1.7.
...
2024-10-18 - Case Details
The Panel concludes
that the Parties have been given a fair opportunity to present their case, and so that the administrative
proceeding takes place with due expedition the Panel will proceed to a Decision accordingly.
6.2 Substantive Issues
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-11-06 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-11-25 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2024-12-02 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
In accordance with paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Complainant must prove that each of the three following
elements is satisfied:
(i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark 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.
page 4
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...
2024-10-24 - Case Details