In addition, the Complainant filed an application with the United States Patent and Trademark Of f ice for the
trademark BRIDOR EXPRESS under the serial No. 98248418 on October 31, 2023. Also, the Complainant
has used the domain name (registered on March 26, 1998) for many years, which resolves to
its of f icial website.
...It is the settled view of panels applying the Policy that the Top-Level Domain (“TLD”) (here “.com”) may be
disregarded under the f irst element test, as such is considered a standard registration requirement.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...
2024-05-06 - Case Details
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...D2025-0763).
The use of the disputed domain name for f raud as discussed below cannot confer rights or legitimate
interests on the Respondent (WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13). ...
2025-07-22 - Case Details
In any event, as discussed above, the use of the inherently misleading disputed domain name to
resolve to a website falsely suggesting a relationship with the Complainant does not support a f inding of
rights or legitimate interests.
The Panel f inds the second element of the Policy has been established.
...Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegitimate activities, here, impersonation/passing of f ,
constitutes bad faith. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4.
The Panel f inds that the Complainant has established the third element of the Policy.
7. ...
2025-12-29 - Case Details
As set forth in WIPO
Overview 3.0, section 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.”
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...Here, the record indicates
that Respondent has done neither.
The Panel f inds that Complainant has established its prima facie case and without any evidence f rom
Respondent to the contrary, the Panel is satisfied that Complainant has satisfied the second element of the
Policy.
...
2025-12-29 - Case Details
By using the Registrar’s service, the Respondent has tried to prevent the
Complainant f rom identifying the Respondent and take actions against the Respondent’s unlawful
actions. The Respondent’s identity and contact details disclosed by the Registrar are also totally f ictive.
...See section 1.11.1 of the
WIPO Overview 3.1.
Accordingly, the Panel f inds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
ALSTOM Trademark and the f irst element in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been established.
...
2026-04-24 - Case Details
The disputed domain name includes the Complainant’s trademark merely
followed by the word “store”, which demonstrates the Respondent’s attempt to take unfair advantage of
Internet users who may think that it is an of f icial website (of ) or a website af f iliated to the Complainant.
Furthermore, the email address and telephone number of the Respondent are associated to f raudulent
websites.
...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.
...
2026-02-12 - Case Details
Furthermore, the
Complainant explains that it appears f rom the UDRP decisions that the Respondent reveals a pattern of
conduct whereby it registers domain names corresponding to recently f iled European Union or other
trademark applications.
...Further, the gTLD “.com” is a standard registration requirement and does not prevent the disputed domain
name f rom being identical to the COL2V Trademark. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.11.1.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...
2025-12-05 - Case Details
The Panel is satisfied that the disputed domain name consists of an intentional misspelling of the GALERIES
LAFAYETTE Mark, which is considered by panels to be confusingly similar to the relevant mark for purposes
of the f irst element (WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.9).
Based on the available record, the Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...In the absence of any
other explanation, which the Respondent did not provide, the Panel f inds it plausible that the Respondent
intended to take advantage thereof .
The fact that the disputed domain name is currently inactive does not change the Panel’s f inding on bad
faith. ...
2024-07-03 - Case Details
Her official social media page on Instagram has 6.6 million followers,
and the one on Facebook has 4.4 million followers, while her official page on Spotify has more than 4 million
monthly listeners. The Complainant operates her of f icial online store at the domain name
, where of f icial music and authorized merchandise are of fered for sale.
...As discussed in the previous section, the disputed domain name carries a high risk of implied af f iliation with
the Complainant, and the Respondent has used it for a website that claimed to be an “Erykah Badu Off icial
Fan Site” and offered for sale ERYKAH BADU-branded goods that were referred to as the Complainant’s
“Of f icial Fan Merch”. ...
2025-05-12 - Case Details
Notably, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name reproduces in its entirety the
Complainant’s well-known trademark with the addition of the term “f rance” which is insuf f icient to avoid a
f inding of confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s trademark, as
recognized by past UDRP panels.
...Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity such as the sale of counterfeit goods,
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.
...
2024-02-22 - Case Details
It operates over a hundred locations in the United States and provides f reight and other
transportation services to over 300 international destinations in one hundred countries.
...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13.1 states, “Panels
have categorically held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity (e.g., the sale of counterfeit goods or
illegal pharmaceuticals, phishing, distributing malware, unauthorized account access/hacking,
impersonation/passing of f , or other types of f raud) can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a
respondent”.
...
2025-06-30 - 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 disputed domain name resolves to a default holding page provided by the hosting provider and there is
no indication of any bona f ide of fering of goods or services, or any legitimate use. In view of these
circumstances and taking into account the established reputation of the Complainant’s mark, the Panel f inds
that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
...
2025-05-22 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name <f iosf iber.com> (the “Domain Name”) is registered with HOSTINGER
Operations, UAB (the “Registrar”).
3. ...WIPO Overview 3.0,
section 1.7.
While the addition of other terms, here “f iber”, may bear on assessment of the second and third elements,
the Panel f inds the addition of such a term does not prevent a f inding of confusing similarity between the
Domain Name and the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2023-12-21 - Case Details
Established more than a century ago, the group is today the second-largest banking and insurance services
provider in France, serving approximately 12 million clients through 3,178 of f ices organized within 18
regional federations. The Complainant oversees, coordinates, and represents the network’s activities and
operates of f icial online portals at “www.creditmutuel.com” and “www.creditmutuel.f r”, used for public
information and online banking services.
...Panels have also found that the non-use of a domain name does not prevent the f inding of bad faith under
the doctrine of passive holding. In this case, the distinctiveness and reputation of the Complainant’s
trademark, the composition of the disputed domain name, the Respondent’s concealment of identity, and the
presence of payment-related technical conf igurations further reinforce the f inding of bad faith.
...
2026-04-08 - Case Details
The evidence provided by the Complainant (i.e., emails impersonating one of the Complainant’s employees)
indicates that the disputed domain name has been used to perpetrate a f raudulent scheme. Panels have
held that the use of a domain name for illegitimate activity (here, claimed impersonation/passing of f and
phishing) can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a respondent. ...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4. Having reviewed the record, the
Panel f inds the Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name constitutes bad faith under
the Policy.
...
2025-12-05 - Case Details
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
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.
...For the above reasons, in the Panel’s view, the evidence in the case file as presented does not indicate that
the Respondent’s aim in registering the disputed domain name was to prof it f rom or exploit the
Complainant’s trade mark.
The Panel f inds the third element of the Policy has not been established.
7. ...
2025-08-18 - Case Details
The word “groupe” is found in the second part of the disputed domain name, which is same as the third part
of the Complainant’s trademark. The f irst part of the disputed domain name, “alvazzzi”, is different f rom the
f irst part of the Complainant’s trademark in that just an additional “z” is added in the disputed domain name.
...The Panel f inds that the disputed domain name was used in bad
faith under paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. ...
2025-12-29 - Case Details
The addition of the term “exports” in the disputed domain name
does not prevent this f inding. WIPO Overview 3.1, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...Therefore, in the circumstances of this case, the Panel f inds that the
Respondent registered the disputed domain name in bad faith.
With regard to the requirement that the disputed domain name is being used in bad faith, the fact that the
disputed domain name has been used as an email address f rom which a f raudulent emails have been
dispatched is enough to show that the Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name is in bad faith.
...
2026-04-09 - Case Details
The Panel f inds in the circumstances that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of
the disputed domain name. ...Maier/
Steven A. Maier
Presiding Panelist
/Andrew F. Christie/
Andrew F. Christie
Panelist
/Matthew S. Harris/
Matthew S. Harris
Panelist
Date: February 5, 2026
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
eProfiler Solutions Ltd. v. ...
2026-02-12 - Case Details
The Respondent is
not af f iliated with the Complainant and has never been authorized or licensed to use the WHATSAPP
trademark in any manner. ...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.11.1.
Therefore, the Panel f inds the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
trademark and that the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
...
2025-04-08 - Case Details