The Respondent is Lorna Kang, of Perak, Malaysia.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the "Domain Name") is registered with iHoldings.com Inc. d/b/a DotRegistrar.com ("the Registrar").
3. ...The only difference between such trading name and the Domain Name is the absence of "s" at the end of the Domain Name.
The Complainant further contends that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to one or more of the Complainant’s service marks, as identified in section 4. ...
2004-03-29 - Case Details
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...See, e.g., B & H Foto & Electronics Corp. v. Domains by Proxy, Inc. / Joseph Gross,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0842.
In the instant proceeding, the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s GGDB and GOLDEN GOOSE marks because they incorporate these marks in their entirety as the dominant element of each disputed domain name. ...
2018-05-09 - Case Details
The Respondent is terea house, Türkiye.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Automattic Inc. ...The entirety of the TEREA mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed
domain name is confusingly similar to the TEREA mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2026-07-27 - Case Details
The Respondent is Withheld for Privacy Purposes, Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf, Iceland / Charl Lotter, United Kingdom.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7 (“in cases where a domain name incorporates the entirety of a trademark, or where at least a dominant feature of the relevant mark is recognizable in the domain name, the domain name will normally be considered confusingly similar to that mark for purposes of UDRP standing”). ...
2021-06-28 - Case Details
The Respondent is Holger Doelle of Berlin, Germany.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the "Domain Name") is registered with United-domains AG (the "Registrar").
3. ...The Respondent resells the Complainant's goods on the website posted under its Domain Name. The panel in the seminal case Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2001- 0903, formulated a test for determining whether a reseller can be making a bona fide offering of goods and services and thus has a legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. ...
2015-01-30 - Case Details
The Complainant further
alleges that the Respondent offers no products or services under the Domain
Name, nor is the Respondent commonly known by the Domain Name or making any
non-commercial or fair use of the Domain Name. ...With respect to the confusing
similarity between Complainant's trademark and Respondent's Domain Name; In
the decision, The Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Boris Karpachev, WIPO
Case No. 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. ...
2001-12-10 - Case Details
The Respondent is huade wang, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Sav.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Respondent has no rights nor legitimate interests in the disputed domain name as it has no rights on
PLUXEE as corporate name, trade name, shop sign, mark or domain name that would be prior to the
Complainant’s rights on PLUXEE.
...
2024-08-08 - Case Details
The Respondent is Khalifa, of United Arab Emirates.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with AE Domain Administration (.aeDA).
3. ...case=D2000-1399
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Matrix JVCO Ltd v. Khalifa
Case No. DAE2025-0015
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2025-12-16 - Case Details
The Respondent is Domains By Proxy, LLC, United States of America (“USA”) / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico, Panama.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...In view of the above, the Panel concludes that the Complainant has established that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name.
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
Based on the undisputed information and the evidence provided by the Complainant, the Panel finds that at the time of registration of the Domain Name the Respondent was or should have been aware of the Trade Marks, since
- the Respondent’s registration of the Domain Name occurred almost 23 years after the registration of the earliest of the Trade Marks;
- the incorporation in the Domain Name of a deliberate misspelling of the Trade Marks, by adding, deleting, substituting or reversing the order of the letters (so-called typo-squatting, see Fendi S.r.l. v. ...
2021-12-07 - Case Details
The Respondent is Michael Lishuai, France.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant must make a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in
the disputed domain name, which the Respondent may rebut (e.g., Croatia Airlines d.d. v. Modern Empire
Internet Ltd., WIPO Case No. ...
2023-01-20 - Case Details
The Respondent is Zhangming Li, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Respondent has not provided evidence of a legitimate use of the disputed domain name or reasons to justify the choice of the term “breguet” in the disputed domain name. Further, there is no indication to show that the Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name or otherwise has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...
2021-07-15 - Case Details
The Respondent is Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc. of Kirkland, Washington, United States of America / Domain Network Solutions LLC of San Francisco, California, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with eNom (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Complainant.
Debrett G. Lyons
Sole Panelist
Date: August 4, 2014
1 See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. ...
2014-08-14 - Case Details
On December 31, 2002, the Center transmitted via email to Tucows, Inc., a request for registrar verification in connection with this case and on December 31, 2002, the Center received a verification response confirming that the domain names are registered with Tucows, Inc., and that the registrant for each of the domain names is the Respondent whose name corresponds to the disputed domain name.
In accordance with Paragraph 4(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("ICANN Rules") and Paragraph 5 of the Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("Supplemental Rules"), the Center verified that the Complaint satisfies the formal requirements of the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("ICANN Policy"), ICANN Rules and Supplemental Rules.
...
2002-03-06 - Case Details
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...Rights or Legitimate Interests
Under paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy, a complainant must make a prima facie showing that a respondent
possesses no rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name. See, e.g., Malayan Banking Berhad
v. Beauty, Success & Truth International, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-11-08 - Case Details
Respondent is Shawn Cooper, Vertical Events Inc., United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with GoDaddy.com,
LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Badgley
Sole Panelist
Date: November 26, 2024
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Netflix, Inc. v. Shawn Cooper, Vertical Events Inc.
Case No. D2024-3939
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. ...
2024-12-05 - Case Details
The Respondent is Natalia Lisnyuk, One-Plus-Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu.
...The entirety of the Complainant’s XIAOMI 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.
...
2025-02-28 - Case Details
The Respondent is Wix.com Ltd., Wix.com Ltd., United States / Ali Oudah, Ayadi Group, Iraq.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Wix.com Ltd. ...The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...
2021-08-09 - Case Details
Kisch Inc., South Africa.
The Respondent is Omur Kaba, Turkey.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Nics Telekomunikasyon A.S. ...In this regard, the Panel is convinced that the Respondent cannot be assessed as a legitimate repair service for the Complainant’s products in light of Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2001-0903 (“Oki Data”) and thus is not entitled to use the disputed domain name accordingly. ...
2019-08-16 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Complainant filed an Amended Complaint on June 26, 2013 in which Complainant withdrew the second disputed domain name (and the registrant identified by the Registrar for that disputed domain name), so that this proceeding could go forward with a single domain name.
...
2013-08-29 - Case Details
The Center then proceeded to verify whether the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (hereinafter the "Policy"), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (hereinafter the "ICANN Rules") and the World Intellectual Property Organization Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (hereinafter the "WIPO Rules"), including the payment of the requisite fees.
...Ltd. v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO D2000-0003). While Respondent appears not to have a real interest in the Domain Names, the Complainant is prevented from reflecting the name of its law firm in a corresponding ".com" domain name. ...
2001-01-09 - Case Details