Factual Background
The Complainant is a Belgian company. It was founded in 1986 as a spin-of f f rom a Belgian university.
Its name is an acronym for “ion beam application”. It is a manufacturer of specialized medical equipment.
...The Panel cannot see that this possible one day delay in
f iling the Response has caused any prejudice to the Complainant and (assuming it was f iled late) the Panel
exercises its discretion to admit the Response.
...
2023-10-20 - Case Details
WIPO
Overview 3.0, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...Further, the prior existence of the copycat site, invokes the f inding that Panels have held that the use of a
domain name for illegitimate activity, here claimed phishing and impersonation/passing of f , constitutes bad
faith. ...
2025-12-16 - Case Details
Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity (here, claimed
impersonation/passing of f , or other types of f raud) can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a
respondent. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13.1.
...Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity (here, claimed impersonation/passing of f ,
or other types of fraud) constitutes bad faith. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4. Having reviewed the record,
the Panel f inds that the Complainant has provided evidence that the Respondent has used the disputed
domain name to generate f raudulent email to the Complainant’s prospective employee in an attempt to
obtain payment from him or her. ...
2024-05-30 - Case Details
Furthermore, there is no evidence indicating that the
Respondent has engaged in any legitimate or bona f ide use of the disputed domain name, either for
commercial or noncommercial purposes, as the disputed domain name, before the Complaint was f iled,
resolved to a webpage of “BioPak Ltd” featuring a number of images of food packages identical to those on
the Complainant’s website. ...The Panel therefore f inds that the Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name
constitutes bad faith under the Policy.
...
2025-04-07 - Case Details
That website provides a United Kingdom contact
telephone number but provides an of f ice address in Sandhurst, Sandton, South Africa. A map is also
provided for that address, and that maps identif ies that of f ice as belonging to an entity using the name
“PostNet”.
5. ...WIPO Overview
3.0, section 1.8.
6.10 The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests and Registered and Used in Bad Faith
6.11 It is usual for panels under the Policy to consider the issues of rights or legitimate interests and
registration and use in bad faith in turn. ...
2025-06-13 - Case Details
In the circumstances, the Panel is of the view that it would be equitable and procedurally ef f icient to permit
consolidation of the Complainants in the present proceeding. Accordingly, the Panel has determined to allow
the f iling of the Complaint by multiple Complainants. ...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
As noted above, the Complainant has provided evidence showing that the disputed domain names have
been used in an ef fort to impersonate the Complainant. ...
2025-06-20 - Case Details
In addition, the Respondent sent email communications to the Center on May 21 and 23, 2025. The
Complainant f iled supplemental f ilings on May 26, 2025, and June 13, 2025.
page 2
The Center appointed W. ...Here, the Respondent (not represented by counsel) raised several issues in email communications before
f iling the Response, and the Complainant replied to issues raised in either the emails or in the Response, in
two supplemental f ilings. ...
2025-07-07 - Case Details
Notably, the Complainant contends as follows:
The Complainant’s perfumes, which were launched under the brand CONCRETED, have been featured on
Fragrantica, one of the most authoritative online f ragrance databases worldwide, thus showing that they
have garnered notable recognition within the f ragrance community worldwide.
...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.11.1.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...
2025-09-25 - Case Details
Although the addition of other terms (here, “of f icial”) may bear on assessment of the second and third
elements, the Panel finds the addition of such term does not prevent a f inding of confusing similarity between
the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant’s Trademark for the purposes of the Policy. ...However, the
Respondent’s failure to file a Response may result in the Panel drawing appropriate inferences f rom such
default. The Panel may also accept all reasonable and supported allegations and inferences f lowing f rom
the Complainant as true (see Entertainment Shopping AG v. ...
2026-01-29 - Case Details
The
website associated with the disputed domain name presently forwards traf f ic to the Complainant’s of f icial
website, albeit that it remains under the Respondent’s control and could be redirected elsewhere. ...The Panel f inds that this, in and of itself, constitutes an abusive threat (hanging over the head of
the Complainant), which also supports a f inding of bad faith in the circumstances of this case.
...
2025-04-08 - Case Details
Taking the foregoing provisions into consideration the Panel f inds as follows.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the f irst element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...In this respect, panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity (such as
impersonation/passing of f , or other types of f raud) can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a
respondent. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13.1.
...
2024-04-03 - Case Details
In the absence of a clear justif ication or demonstrated relevance to the
Domain Name, the Panel f inds no basis to consider these unsolicited communications.
Accordingly, the Panel disregards the Respondent’s supplemental f ilings.
6.2. ...The Panel f inds that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for
commercial gain, Internet users to the Website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s
trademark as to the source, sponsorship, af f iliation, or endorsement of the Website.
...
2025-08-12 - Case Details
Complainant holds various trademark registrations for the mark LPL, including United States Patent and
Trademark Of f ice Reg. No. 1801076, registered on October 26, 1993 in connection with “f inancial
management services” with a 1992 f irst use in commerce.
...At the time the Complaint in this proceeding was f iled, the
Domain Name resolved to what Complainant describes as “a cloned version of the
Complainant's of f icial website.” ...
2024-10-23 - Case Details
Respondent
The Center received communications from email addresses connected to the disputed domain name and
f rom an entity presenting itself as the Respondent’s representative. Given the assertions, the Panel will treat
the contentions together as coming f rom the “Respondent”.
...The Respondent provided no explanation
why it could not comply with this time limit and why its supplemental f iling should be admitted at this late
stage. In view of this, the Respondent’s supplemental f iling should normally not be admitted in the
proceeding. ...
2023-10-30 - Case Details
Complainant also shows it incorporates the REVE Mark into its of f icial domain names and
both of which are used to access Complainant’s of f icial websites (“Of f icial Websites”) where
Complainant offers and advertises its software and AI tools and services to its customers under the REVE
Mark.
...See WIPO Overview 3.1,
sections 1.7 and 1.8 (“Where the relevant trademark is recognizable within the disputed domain name, the
addition of other terms (whether descriptive, geographical, pejorative, meaningless, or otherwise) would not
prevent a f inding of confusing similarity under the f irst element”); see also United Talent Agency, LLC v.
...
2026-04-09 - Case Details
Complainant
asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the ELLE Mark because the disputed domain
name clearly incorporates Complainant’s ELLE Mark in its entirety, followed by the term “india” and the Top-
Level Domain (“TLD”) “.com”, neither of which is suf f icient to prevent a f inding of confusing similarity.
Complainant submits that there are no rights or legitimate interests held by Respondent in respect of the
disputed domain name. ...Accordingly, the
Panel f inds the disputed domain name confusingly similar to the ELLE Mark in which Complainant has rights
and Complainant has thus satisf ied its burden under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2025-09-12 - Case Details
The Top-Level Domain suffix in respect of the disputed domain name, here, “.com”, is typically disregarded
under the f irst element test. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.11.1.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...The Panel invites the Complainant to take note of these observations should it wish to make future f ilings
under the Policy.
The Panel f inds that the Complainant has established the third element of the Policy.
7. ...
2025-05-12 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...The Panel f inds that the Complainant has established the third element of the Policy.
...
2025-08-29 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.8.
Based on the available record, the Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...case=D2014-0365
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2010/d2010-0260.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 8
and the Respondent’s lack of rebuttal to the Complainant’s contentions, and f inds that under the
circumstances of this case the passive holding of the disputed domain names does not prevent a f inding of
bad faith under the Policy.
...
2023-12-13 - Case Details
The domain accurately discloses that the registrant is not af f iliated with
the Complainant. A disclaimer stating “Not af f iliated with Tesla, Inc.” is prominently displayed on every
page 4
subdomain, page, and tab. ...Therefore, the Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...
2024-02-07 - Case Details