The third element a complainant must establish
is that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
page 3
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires that the Complainant establish that the disputed domain name is
identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-06-21 - Datos del caso
Complainant
The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks. The disputed
domain name identically adopts the Complainant’s trademark. ...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-07-07 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in the Complainant’s Trademark, based on its various
trademark registrations listed above in Section 4.
...As such, the Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
Trademark, and accordingly, paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2022-06-03 - Datos del caso
The Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s FIDELITY
trademark. Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has established paragraph 4(a)(i) of the
Policy.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered or Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-06-02 - Datos del caso
The Complainant bears the burden of proof for each of these elements.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the Complainant to show that the disputed domain names are
identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...The Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly
similar to the Complainant’s LEGO marks. The Respondent’s incorporation of the Complainant’s mark in
full in the disputed domain names is evidence that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the
Complainant’s marks. ...
2022-06-30 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has established rights over the trademark BLACKBAUD based on the
trademark registrations cited under section 4 above.
...As indicated above, the disputed domain name, confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, has
been pointed to a website displaying pay-per-click links related to the Complainant’s market niche.
...
2022-06-29 - Datos del caso
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainants’ trademark
PRAGMATICPLAY. The mark PRAGMATICPLAY is clearly recognizable in the disputed domain name. The
Panel has had little difficulty in finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark
PRAGMATICPLAY. The addition of the two letters “tw” and the hyphen “-” does not prevent the finding of
confusingly similarity.
...
2022-06-29 - Datos del caso
Further, according to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules, the Panel may draw such inferences from Respondent’s
failure to submit a Response as it considers appropriate.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar with the
PRINCIPAL trademark in which Complainant has rights.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-06-27 - Datos del caso
Considering these requirements, the Panel rules as follows:
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the Complainant to show that the disputed domain name is identical
or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark in which
the Complainant has rights, meaning that the Complainant has satisfied the requirement under
paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2022-05-06 - Datos del caso
Nevertheless, the Panel may rule in the Complainant’s favor only after the
Complainant has proven that the above elements are present.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, the Complainant is required to establish that the disputed domain
name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
...Therefore, the Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the
Complainant’s trademark because it is clearly recognizable in the disputed domain name.
...
2022-07-01 - Datos del caso
The Panel determines that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s MODERNA
trademark.
Complainant has established that it owns rights in the trademark MODERNA and that the disputed domain
names is confusingly similar to that trademark.
...There is scant evidence
on the record of this proceeding as to why Respondent decided to register the disputed domain name
confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark and company name. Respondent had notice and opportunity
to present evidence to the Panel regarding its motive for such registration. ...
2022-06-15 - Datos del caso
The Panel will deal with each of the requirements in turn.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the Complainant to show that the Domain Name is (i) identical or
confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark, (ii) in which the Complainant has rights.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-06-14 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has proved that it has rights in the trademark CENTERPOINT ENERGY.
...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar with the trademark CENTERPOINT ENERGY in which the Complainant has rights and that the requirements of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy therefore are fulfilled.
...
2022-03-02 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
As set forth in section 1.7 of WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”) the standing test for confusing similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightforward comparison between the trademark and the disputed domain name to determine whether the disputed domain name is confusingly similar with the trademark. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar with the BEIN trademark in which the Complainant has rights and that the requirements of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy are fulfilled.
...
2022-02-09 - Datos del caso
Long after the Complainant established its rights in its famous trademark, and with its knowledge, the Respondent acquired the confusingly similar disputed domain name to redirect Internet traffic to websites with links displaying the Complainant’s trademark and promoting PPC or affiliate advertising links for the Respondent’s commercial gain. ...Under such circumstances the Panel finds that the Complainant’s trademark is recognizable within the disputed domain name and the copying of the Complainant’s sub-domain confirms that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name precisely because it believed that it was confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.
Considering the above the Panel finds the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, therefore, the Complainant has established its case under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2022-02-14 - Datos del caso
Its main arguments can be summarized as follows:
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its MIROVA trademark
because it incorporates said trademark in its entirety and the latter remains recognizable within it.
...Taking the foregoing provisions into consideration the Panel finds as follows.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, the Complainant must first establish rights in a trademark or
service mark and secondly establish that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its
trademark.
...
2022-11-11 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant must demonstrate that it has rights in a trademark or service mark and, if so, the domain
name must be shown to be identical or confusingly similar to that mark.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-10-31 - Datos del caso
The Panel finds, therefore, that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s MODERNA
mark for purposes of the first Policy element and concludes that the Complainant has established the first
element of the Complaint.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-08-11 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, there are two requirements which the Complainant must establish, first
that it has rights in a trademark or service mark, and second that the disputed domain name is identical or
confusingly similar to the trademark or service mark.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-09-05 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in the Complainant’s Trademark, based on its various
trademark registrations listed above in Section 4.
...As such, the Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
Trademark, and accordingly, paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2022-09-05 - Datos del caso