Accordingly, the disputed domain
name is identical to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. 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
Because Complainant has manifestly failed to establish that Respondent registered and used the disputed
domain name in bad faith, the Panel need not make a f inding regarding whether Complainant has
established that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
...Respondent could
not have been required to foresee that at some point substantially following its registration of the disputed
domain name a third party would seek to assert rights in the combination of common terms in the disputed
domain name so as to preclude Respondent f rom undertaking its initial registration.
The evidence in the case f ile as presented does not indicate that Respondent’s aim in registering the
disputed domain name was to prof it f rom or exploit the Complainant’s trademark.
...
2025-04-11 - Case Details
The Complainant owns several trademark registrations, including:
- United States Trademark Registration no. 4814856 for BREAD, f iled on December 15, 2014,
registered on September 15, 2015, for the services in class 36;
- United States Trademark Registration no. 7237587 for BREAD SAVINGS, f iled on March 9, 2022,
registered on December 5, 2023, for the services in class 36;
- United States Trademark Registration no. 7300264 for BREAD FINANCIAL, f iled on December 13,
2021, registered on February 6, 2024, for the services in class 36;
- United States Trademark Registration no. 7305646 for BREAD FINANCIAL, f iled on December 14,
2021, registered on February 13, 2024, for the services in class 42.
...These marks are widely recognized in connection
with banking, credit card, lending, and f inancial services, and have accrued substantial goodwill. The
disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s BREAD FINANCIAL mark, dif fering only
by the omission of a letter “n” in the word “f inancial”. ...
2025-09-16 - Case Details
Although the addition of other terms, here adding a hyphen (or dash) between “Lincoln” and “electric”, adding
“al” to electric,1 and adding “company” may bear on assessment of the second and third elements, the Panel
f inds the addition of such terms does not prevent a f inding of confusing similarity between the disputed
domain name and the mark for the purposes of the Policy. 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.
...
2025-09-08 - Case Details
The Complaint refers to “sponsored listings” to third parties, but
the Panel f inds no evidence of these in the furnished screenshots. The site proposed broadly described
network security services for USD 9,000 or USD 16,000 and encouraged visitors to email the site operator or
to call a toll-f ree telephone number. ...The absence of an
explanation from the Respondent as to the registration and use of the disputed domain name supports this
f inding.
The Panel f inds that the Complainant has established the third element of the Policy.
7. ...
2025-12-29 - Case Details
WIPO
Overview 3.1, section 1.11.2.
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.
...OETKER (except for the dot af ter the element “DR”) carries a high risk of
implied af f iliation. In addition, the redirection to the Complainant’s of f icial group website ef fectively
impersonates or suggests sponsorship or endorsement of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.
...
2026-04-09 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.2.1. However, the Panel f inds that the “E” device mark is not
suf ficiently distinctive to provide a basis for a f inding of confusing similarity with the disputed domain name in
these circumstances.
...Such a composition carries a risk of implied af f iliation with the Complainant, which is inconsistent with a
f inding that the Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...
2024-11-01 - Case Details
Accordingly, the
Center notif ied Respondent’s default on September 23, 2024.
The Center appointed Gabriel F. Leonardos as the sole panelist in this matter on September 26, 2024. The
Panel f inds that it was properly constituted. ...Accordingly, the disputed
domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark for the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.0,
section 1.7.
The Panel f inds that the disputed domain name is identical and, thus, confusingly similar to Complainant´s
trademark BODOG, with the sole addition of the word “apostas”, that translates to “bets” f rom Portuguese,
separated by a hyphen, which does not prevent a f inding of confusing similarity between the disputed
domain name and Complainant’s trademark.
...
2024-10-14 - Case Details
Adding the generic term “helpdesk” to the beginning of the disputed
domain name, with a hyphen separating it f rom the trade mark SOFINCO, does not prevent a f inding of
confusing similarity under the f irst element.
...The disputed domain name will necessarily be perceived by the public as
being affiliated with or authorized by the Complainant and obviously creates a risk of implied af f iliation.
Several elements support a f inding of bad faith registration and use of the disputed domain name:
First, it is apparent f rom the screenshot submitted in the Complaint that the Respondent is potentially
attempting to install malware in the systems of the users.
...
2024-02-29 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant in this administrative proceeding, Haleon UK IP Limited, formerly GlaxoSmithKline
Consumer Healthcare (UK) IP Limited, is a British multinational consumer healthcare company established in
July 2022 as a corporate spin-of f f rom GSK plc.
The Complainant is one of the world’s largest consumer healthcare companies. ...Having reviewed the available record, the Panel
notes that the Complainant has provided evidence regarding the reputation of its trademark. The
Respondent did not f ile a Response to the Complaint. Considering the degree of distinctiveness or
reputation of the Complainant’s trademark, the composition of the disputed domain name, the Panel f inds
the non-use of the disputed domain name does not prevent a f inding of bad faith in the circumstances of this
proceeding.
...
2025-08-14 - Case Details
It does not currently resolve to a website. Respondent
has been using the Domain Name in a f raudulent scheme. That scheme includes posting fake job openings
to solicit applicants for positions advertised as if they were with Complainant. ...The sole
dif ference between the Domain Name and the Mark is that the former eliminates the letter “s” f rom the
FOURKITES Mark. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.9.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...
2024-08-05 - Case Details
This
combination strongly suggests an intent to trade of f the reputation and goodwill of the Complainant by
misleading users into believing that the disputed domain name is af f iliated with or endorsed by the
Complainant.
...The Respondent registered the disputed domain name about seven years af ter the Complainant’s
trademark registration;
ii. A note reading “we earn commissions f rom qualifying transactions through the af f iliate marketing
program” appears on the Respondent website, falsely suggesting the Respondent’s affiliation with the
Complainant;
iii. ...
2025-08-29 - Case Details
Although the addition of other terms (here, “iim”) may bear on assessment of the second and third elements,
the Panel f inds the addition of such term does not prevent a f inding of confusing similarity between the
disputed domain name and the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...As to paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy, and as further discussed in section 6C below, the Panel considers that
the Respondent has used the disputed domain name to intentionally attempt to attract, confuse and prof it
f rom Internet users seeking the Complainant’s goods and/or services. Such use of the disputed domain
name could not be said to be bona f ide.
...
2025-04-17 - Case Details
The Disputed Domain Names were registered on the following dates:
- f inancial.cfd> (registered January 12, 2025);
- f inancial-login.cfd> (registered January 12, 2025);
- (registered February 26, 2025);
- (registered April 2, 2025).
...This is bad faith use.
Policy, paragraph 4(b)(iv).
The Panel f inds that Complainant has established the third element of the Policy.
7. 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 Names f inancial.cfd>, f inancial-login.cfd>,
and be transferred to Complainant.
...
2025-07-09 - 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.
...Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity such as, phishing, distributing malware,
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.
...
2024-06-14 - Case Details
It appears f rom Annexes 3 and 6 to the Complaint that the Complainant promotes its services f rom the
website “www.coderio.co”. ...As the Complaint points out, the Complainant successfully opposed an attempt by a Coderio LLC to register
CODERIO as a trademark in the United States in respect of technology, computer and sof tware services in
International Class 42. The Panel has established f rom the United States Patent and Trademark Of f ice
records online that:
(a) The application was accorded serial number 97898334;
(b) The application was f iled on April 20, 2023;
(c) The application was f iled by a Wyoming corporation based in California called Coderio LLC;
(d) The application was signed on behalf of Coderio LLC by “Jose Colina” as the company’s CEO; and
(e) The Complainant’s opposition to registration (initially f iled on April 4, 2024) was successful when
Coderio LLC submitted an abandonment of the application on January 8, 2025.
...
2025-04-15 - 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.
...That risk of implied affiliation is further reinforced by the
content of the website and the use of the Complainant’s trademark and logos similar to the Complainant’s
logo and f igurative trademark.
In addition, under paragraph 14(b) of the Rules the Panel may draw f rom the lack of response of the
Respondent such inference as it considers appropriate. ...
2025-04-11 - Case Details
The
Panel f inds the Respondent registered and has used the disputed domain names with opportunistic bad
faith, with the intention to increase the traffic to its websites and probably to perform any type of phishing or
other type of f raud.
...Such
conduct, if it were true, constitutes bad faith under the Policy (WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4). The Panel
f inds, however, there is not sufficient evidence in the record to consider the Respondent is involved in any
f raud.
...
2025-06-23 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant operates in the f ield of global brokerage and f inancial technology.
The Complainant holds a portfolio of trademark for BGC in different jurisdictions. ...There are no exceptional circumstances within paragraph 5(f ) of the Rules to prevent the Panel f rom
determining the dispute based upon the Complaint, notwithstanding the failure of the Respondents to f ile a
Response. ...
2025-11-10 - Case Details
The Panel has not received any requests f rom the Complainant or the Respondents regarding further
submissions, waivers or extensions of deadlines, and the Panel has not found it necessary to request any
further information f rom the Parties.
...The Panel f inds that there is plausible evidence that the disputed domain names are
subject to common control, and that it would be procedurally ef f icient, fair, and equitable to all Parties to
accept the Complainant’s consolidation request. ...
2023-11-24 - Case Details
The disputed domain name was registered on February 6, 2025 and at the time of the Complaint f iling it
resolved to an inactive webpage displaying an error message.
The Respondent is based in Brazil.
5. ...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.
...
2025-04-22 - Case Details