The Respondent is Jonathan Lew, USA .
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name, , is registered with Spaceship, Inc. ...WIPO
Overview 3.0, sections 1.7 and 1.8. And see TPI Holdings, Inc. v. Carmen Armengol, WIPO Case No.
D2009-0361.
Therefore, the Panel finds that the Complainant has carried its burden of proof to show that the disputed
domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark per Policy paragraph 4(a)(i).
...
2024-11-11 - Case Details
The
Complainant has never authorized the Respondent to register the disputed domain name. The Respondent
has never been known by the disputed domain name, and has never used the disputed domain name as a
trade mark, company name, business or trade name prior to the registration of the disputed domain name.
...Lundbeck A/S v. Jose Quiroz
Case No. D2024-0872
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2024-05-07 - Case Details
Respondent is Sarah Giustra / Seal Pup Designs of Hollywood, Florida, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...This is because the Panel finds that Respondent is in bad faith for her “passive holding” of a Domain Name confusingly similar to a famous trademark under the principle first enunciated in Telstra Corporation Limited v. ...
2017-05-30 - Case Details
The Respondent is Privacy Protect, LLC (PrivacyProtect.org), United States / Oscar Dominguez, Spain.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The fact the Disputed Domain Name is not being actively used does not prevent a finding of bad faith (see WIPO Overview 3.3 and Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-08-15 - Case Details
The Respondent is Milen Radumilo, Romania.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Communigal Communications 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”).
...
2022-11-15 - Case Details
The Respondent is Whois Agent, Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc., United States / Artsiom Dryneuski, Belarus.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with eNom, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Domain Name incorporates the Complainant’s MONSTER ENERGY trademark in its entirety. As numerous UDRP panels have held, incorporating a trademark in its entirety is sufficient to establish that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark (see PepsiCo, Inc. v. ...
2022-01-26 - Case Details
That the Respondent has not used the disputed domain name or a name corresponding to the disputed domain name in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services
That the Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name.
...The disputed domain name was the object of a previous proceeding, Eurobank Ergasias S.A. v. Domain Manager / Domain Manager,
WIPO Case No. ...
2016-05-24 - Case Details
The Respondent is John Akoogun, United Kingdom.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with One.com A/S (the “Registrar”).
3. ...See, e.g., Admiral Group Plc and EUI Limited v. Cimpress Schweiz, Cimpress Schweiz GmbH,
WIPO Case No. DCO2017-0043, where the panel stated that, “[r]espondent has used the disputed domain name as a fake email address in order to impersonate the CFO of Complainant A and mislead some employees, recipients of the emails. ...
2021-05-27 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Name.com, Inc. (Name.com LLC) (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Previous UDRP decisions have found that the mere addition of symbols such as a hyphen to a trademark in a domain name do not avoid a finding of confusing similarity. This has been held in many UDRP cases (see, e.g., Inter-IKEA Systems B.V. v. ...
2021-04-01 - Case Details
The Respondent is Sunday Brodon, United States of America (“United States”).
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with
Center of Ukrainian Internet Names (UKRNAMES) (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Furthermore, the use of hyphens in the Disputed Domain Name is irrelevant in a finding of confusing
similarity, see e.g. Royale Indian Rail Tours Limited v. ...
2023-12-12 - Case Details
The Respondent is Artur Kezano, Russian Federation.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Registrar of Domain Names REG.RU LLC
(the “Registrar”).
3. ...The above trademarks and domain name were registered prior to the registration of the disputed domain
name, which was registered on July 23, 2023.
...
2023-11-27 - Case Details
The Respondent is John Deecon, TrafficDomains INC, Malaysia.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with Web
Commerce Communications Limited dba WebNic.cc (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Furthermore, the Domain Name is inactive and there is no
intention to use the Domain Name for purposes of bona fide offerings of goods and services on the internet.
...
2025-09-03 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot Inc (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The disputed domain name was registered on October 27, 2023. The disputed domain name did not resolve
to an active webpage at the time of filing the Complaint. ...
2024-07-17 - Case Details
The Respondent is Whois Privacy, Private Desing, LLC, the United States / Hoan Mr, Viet Nam.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Porkbun LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...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”).
...
2021-12-13 - Case Details
The Respondent is swarovskishop.co swarovskishop.co of Venice, Italy.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...There are two reasons for this. The Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name as its company name or trade name cannot create a defense under paragraph 4(c)(ii) of the Policy where the domain name was registered in bad faith. ...
2013-10-01 - Case Details
The Respondent is Withheld for Privacy Purposes, Privacy Service Provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf, Iceland / Jeff Hink, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The disputed domain name currently resolves to an inactive page.
The disputed domain name was registered on August 18, 2021.
5. ...
2021-12-22 - Case Details
G. was the named respondent in a proceeding involving the disputed domain name (Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Jo Y.G.,
WIPO Case No. D2007-1510).
Respondent 3 (“DomainCA - Whois Protect Service”) is the registrar for the disputed domain name, and was named as a respondent because it provided an anonymous registration service for Respondent 2 in connection with the disputed domain name. ...Further, the disputed domain name is merely linked to a domain name parking service, from which the Respondent is receiving improper revenue.
...
2009-10-06 - Case Details
The Respondent is yuhua pang, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Turning to the comparison exercise, the disputed domain name contains the Complainant’s mark in its
entirety, absent the ampersand which cannot be reproduced in a domain name for technical reasons. ...
2023-03-06 - Case Details
Respondent is Hugo Hector Ferreyra of Cordoba, Argentina.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Directi Internet Solutions Pvt Ltd d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com.
3. ...The word "banking" is descriptive and does not remove the confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and Complainant’s trademark. See Yahoo! Inc. and Overture Services, Inc. v. Registrant (187640), a/k/a Gary Lam, a/k/a Birgit Klosterman, a/k/a XC2, a/k/a Robert Chua, a/k/a Registrant,
WIPO Case No. ...
2011-04-06 - Case Details
The Respondent is Domain Admin, TotalDomain Privacy Ltd, Panama.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a
PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Domain Admin, TotalDomain Privacy Ltd
Case No. D2025-3436
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. ...
2025-10-15 - Case Details