The Respondent is Jesus Jesus, Major Air Service, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The Panel finds the mark is recognizable within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed
domain name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2024-09-26 - Case Details
The Respondent is jad akkawi, Lebanon.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...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”).
...
2024-06-05 - Case Details
The Respondent is tong xiaonian, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot Inc (the “Registrar”).
3. ...case=D2012-2123
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
JD SPORTS FASHION PLC v. tong xiaonian
Case No. D2025-3901
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2025-12-05 - Case Details
Die Gesuchsgegnerin ist The Floor Innovation Group AG vertreten durch Walder Haas Berner AG,
Advokatur & Notariat, Schweiz.
2. Streitiger Domain-Name
Gegenstand des Verfahrens ist der Domain-Name (nachfolgend der
„streitgegenständliche Domain-Name”).
...August 2023
EXPERTENENTSCHEID
Sandman AG v. The Floor Innovation Group AG
Verfahren Nr. DCH2023-0014
2. Streitiger Domain-Name
3. Verfahrensablauf
7. ...
2023-09-04 - Case Details
The Respondent is Maxim Filippov, Norway.
2. The Domain Name, Registry and Registrar
The Registry of the disputed domain name is the European Registry for Internet Domains (“EURid” or the “Registry”). ...Furthermore, according to Panel’s searches1 , the Respondent was involved in at least one previous domain name procedure under the ADR Rules, decided against it, see AB Electrolux v. Maxim Filippov,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-06-04 - Case Details
We registered the domain name believing that the domain name we choose [sic] was available for us to use. World Emergency Relief Organization has set up a website under a different domain name. ...See World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc. v. Michael Bossman, Dispute No. D99-0001; Robert Ellenbogen v. Mike Pearson, Dispute No. D00-0001.
However, the UDRP Policy states that the following circumstances shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith:
(i) Circumstances indicating that [the Registrant has] registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the Complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that Complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
(ii) [the Registrant has] registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that [the Registrant has] engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
(iii) [the Registrant has] registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
(iv) by using the domain name, [the Registrant has] intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to [its] web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of [its] web site or location or of a product or service on [its] web site or location.
...
2000-12-07 - Case Details
The Respondent is FRANK UMAN, abbey global, Nigeria.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameSilo, LLC (the “Registrar”)
3. ...The disputed domain name fully incorporates the Complainant’s EGIS trademark, which is clearly
recognizable in the disputed domain name. ...
2023-05-17 - Case Details
The Respondent is David Jones, United Kingdom.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Tucows Inc. (the “Registrar”).
3. .../Assen Alexiev/
Assen Alexiev
Sole Panelist
Date: December 19, 2024
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
PJSC “Lianozovskiy OGK” (Public Joint Stock Company Lianozovskiy Office and Hotel Complex) v. David Jones
Case No. D2024-4522
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2024-12-23 - Case Details
“XML”) of Seoul, the Republic of Korea.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Gabia, Inc.
3. ...This tends to occur in cases where for example a respondent is aware of a complainant's potential rights, and registers a domain name to take advantage of any rights that may arise from a complainant's enterprises. See for example ExecuJet Holdings Ltd. v. ...
2007-09-21 - Case Details
The Respondent is Danilo Ceno, Mexico.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Hostinger, UAB (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Finally, with regard to the disputed domain name having been registered and being used in bad faith, the
Complainant argues that;
- the domain name is infringing the Complainant’s registered trademark;
- the registration of the disputed domain name is harmful and disrupting to the Complainant’s business;
- the disputed domain name can be falsely misinterpreted into thinking that the disputed domain name
is associated with the Complainant; and
- the use of the disputed domain name for an illegal credit card selling website is unethical and causes
a reputational damage to the Complainant.
...
2022-11-17 - Case Details
The Respondent is Cody Woods, New Zealand.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Wild West Domains, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...There is no basis for the
Respondent to have chosen the disputed domain name other than to impersonate the Complainant. The
disputed domain name does not resolve to an active website. ...
2025-12-17 - Case Details
The Respondent is Conggang Cao, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with DropCatch.com LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...According to the evidence submitted by the Complainant, the disputed domain name redirected to a landing page soliciting offers for purchase of the disputed domain name. Without more, such use of the disputed domain name is neither legitimate nor fair. ...
2021-09-20 - Case Details
iv) Respondent has not acquired trademark or service mark rights for the REDE GLOBO mark in Brazil.
v) Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name
vi) Respondent was not authorized in any way to use Complainant’s REDE GLOBO trademark nor to use any domain name incorporating such trademark.
...iii) The Respondent has registered the domain name in order to prevent Complainant from reflecting its marks in corresponding domain name unless Complainant pays to purchase or rent the domain name from Respondent.
...
2000-06-06 - Case Details
The Respondent is Chris Hess, United States of America (“United States”).
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Hostinger Operations, UAB (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Panel finds the mark is recognizable within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed
domain name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2025-05-01 - 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”).
...After a complainant has made a prima facie case, the burden of production shifts to a respondent to present
evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. See, e.g., Croatia Airlines d.d. v.
Modern Empire Internet Ltd., WIPO Case No. D2003-0455.
...
2025-08-19 - Case Details
The second disputed domain name is registered with Hostinger, UAB (the “Second Registrar”)
The third disputed domain name and the fourth disputed domain name <2canva.com> are registered with Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu (the “Third Registrar”).
3. ...Though Panels have recognized that resellers, distributors, or service providers using a domain name containing a complainant’s trademark to undertake sales or repairs related to the complainant’s goods or services may be making a bona fide offering of goods and services and thus have a legitimate interest in such domain name, though certain elements enumerated under the Oki Data test, see section 2.8 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 and Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ...
2022-02-17 - 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").
...In fact, as well explained in National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues, Inc., d/b/a Minor League Baseball v. John Zuccarini,
WIPO Case No. D2002-1011, "Typosquatted domain names are intended to be confusing so that Internauts, who unwittingly make common typing errors, will enter the domain name instead of the mark…".
...
2017-01-13 - Case Details
The difference between the disputed domain name and the Complainant's trademark is the absence of the article “the” in the disputed domain name. ...As recognized in numerous previous decisions, passive holding of a domain name may be regarded as bad faith use in the sense described in Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows,
WIPO Case No. ...
2009-03-19 - Case Details
Respondent is Apex Financial LLC of Issaquah, Washington, U.S.A.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, Inc. ...The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (“Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (“Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (“Supplemental Rules”).
...
2010-11-26 - Case Details
The Respondent is Ji Shupeng of Zhoukou, Henan, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...There are no rights or legitimate interests held by the Respondent in respect of the Domain Name. The Respondent is not commonly known as the Domain Name, nor does the Respondent have any authorization from the Complainant to register the Domain Name. ...
2017-03-27 - Case Details