According to the Registrar’s verification, Respondent is registrant of the disputed domain name. According to that verification the disputed domain name was registered by Respondent on February 3, 2021.
...Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name does not otherwise manifest rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
The Panel determines that Complainant has established that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
...
2021-08-27 - Case Details
The Respondent is Anna Maria Lindemann, Germany.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with PSI-USA, Inc. dba Domain Robot (the “Registrar”).
3. ...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”).
...
2019-06-24 - Case Details
The Respondent is Michael Sorenson of Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Eranet International Limited (the "Registrar").
3. ...Such use of the disputed domain name is, by itself, evidence that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2017-11-21 - Case Details
Respondent is Comar Ltd., Domain Administrator /Whois Privacy Protection Service of St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NICREG LLC.
3. ...Complainant alleges that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Complainant claims that when Respondent registered the disputed domain name it knew or should have known of Complainant's well-known trademark, that Respondent has not provided evidence that it was previously known by or has trademark rights in the disputed domain name, and that use of the disputed domain name to host a parking page offering the disputed domain name for sale does not establish rights or legitimate interests.
...
2010-03-11 - Case Details
The Respondent is Super Privacy Service LTD c/o Dynadot, United States / Rivigo Sollution Pvt LMt, India.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...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”).
...
2020-06-22 - Case Details
The Respondent is Yangfang, bei jing guo tai zhong xing ke ji fa zhan you xian gong si of Beijing, China, self-represented.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with eName Technology Co., Ltd. ...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”).
...
2018-01-25 - Case Details
The Respondent is Long Term ELEC.CO., LTD of Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Tucows Inc. ...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").
...
2015-11-12 - Case Details
The Respondent is Deminzheng of Hong Kong, SAR of the People’s Republic of China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Xin Net Technology Corp.
3. ...The Complainant further contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name and has never traded under the name and that given the use being made of the website under the disputed domain name the disputed domain name was clearly registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2011-05-09 - Case Details
The Respondent is 林宗兴 (Lin Zong Xing), China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with DNSPod, Inc. ...D. The Website at the Disputed Domain Name
The disputed domain name was previously resolved to an English language website with sponsored links. ...
2019-12-09 - Case Details
The Respondent is Domain Service, Viet Nam.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dominet (HK) Limited (the
“Registrar”).
3. ...Moreover, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of
the disputed domain name since it has not been authorized by the Complainant to register the disputed
domain name or to use its trademark within the disputed domain name, it is not commonly known by the
disputed domain name, and it is not making either a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate
noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.
...
2026-05-04 - Case Details
The Respondent is dawin gzel, logaco ltd, Holy See.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The Panel f inds 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. ...
2024-01-25 - Case Details
The Respondent is Domain Administrator, See PrivacyGuardian.org, United States / Mattrix, Epie Steve, Cameroon.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameSilo, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Complainant submits that there is no legitimate reason for the Respondent to have registered the disputed domain name, or for the use to which the disputed domain name has been put.
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. ...
2021-11-18 - Case Details
The Respondent is Banco Nacional de Mexico of Mexico, D.F., Mexico, represented by Molina Salgado & de Alva, Mexico.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with Network Solutions, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Disputed Domain Name pertains to a Mexican bank.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name for the following reasons:
- the Respondent is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name. ...
2013-10-22 - Case Details
Petersburg, Russian
Federation (“the Respondent”) represented by Konsul Ltd., of the
Russian Federation.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (“the Domain Name”)
is registered with Nicco Ltd (“the Registrar”).
3. ...It contends that its customers are confused as a result of its use by the Respondent and it notes that the Respondent’s registration of the Domain Name precludes it from using the Domain Name.
It contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. ...
2005-10-27 - 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”).
...TMA106457 for the word mark LEGO, filed on June 14, 1956,
registered on April 26, 1957, and subsequently renewed.
The disputed domain names are the following:
Disputed domain name Registration Date Use
November 1, 2024 No active webpage.
...
2025-03-27 - Case Details
The Respondent is Registration Private, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The entirety of the ZAO ASIAN GRILL mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly,
the disputed domain name is identical to this mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2026-01-09 - Case Details
The Respondent is saifu lee zhenghao, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with NameSilo, LLC
(the “Registrar”).
3. ...Moreover, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name, whereas the
Respondent is not commonly known by the Domain Name. Even more so, because the Domain Name does
not in any way correspond with the name of the Respondent. ...
2023-09-25 - Case Details
Respondent is John Hinshaw, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The Disputed Domain Name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The entirety of the CORNING Mark is reproduced within the Disputed Domain Name. Accordingly, the
Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the CORNING Mark for the purposes of the Policy.
...
2024-05-14 - Case Details
The Respondent is Adelaja Ricketts, ModavCress, Nigeria.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with CloudFlare, Inc. ...Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark; the
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and the Respondent
registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. ...
2022-11-15 - Case Details
The Respondent is Mudassar Ali, Pakistan.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The entirety of the mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed domain
name is identical to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2026-10-12 - Case Details