A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has established registered rights in its MELA LONDON and MELA LOVES LONDON trademarks. ...The Panel accordingly finds that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, in which the Complainant has rights, and that the provisions of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy have been met.
...
2020-01-31 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This element consists of two parts: first, does the Complainant have rights in a relevant trademark and, second, is the Disputed Domain Name identical or confusingly similar to that trademark. ...Second, in the circumstances of this case, the Respondent’s registration of the Disputed Domain Name that is confusingly similar to (and in this case, misspelled) the Complainant’s trademark is evidence of bad faith registration and use. ...
2020-01-13 - Datos del caso
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. The disputed domain name reproduces entirety of the Complainant’s well-known trademarks IBIS and ACCOR. ...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.
...
2020-01-08 - Datos del caso
Complainant submits that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s FEI trademark as they incorporate the latter in its entirety, simply added by the descriptive terms “live” and “tv”. ...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 names are confusingly similar to the FEI trademark in which Complainant has rights.
...
2020-10-01 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has submitted detailed evidence that it is the owner of various trademarks consisting of the word BROTHER.
Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark for purposes of the Policy, “when the domain name includes the trademark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name” (see Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2020-11-04 - 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.
...According to section 1.11.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, the applicable generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) in a domain name (e.g., “.com”, “.club”, “.nyc”) is viewed as a standard registration requirement and as such is generally disregarded under the first element confusingly similar test.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s TYSON trademark and that requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2021-01-08 - 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.
...According to section 1.11.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, the applicable Top-Level Domain (“TLD”) in a domain name (e.g., “.com”, “.club”, “.nyc”) is viewed as a standard registration requirement and as such is generally disregarded under the first element confusingly similar test.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s TYSON trademark and that requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2021-01-05 - Datos del caso
The disputed domain name is also confusingly similar to the Complainant’s BMW mark because it contains the Complainant’s mark combined with the additional terms “assist” and “offer.” ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel has no doubt that “BMW” is a term directly connected with the Complainant’s notorious automobiles and motorcycles.
...
2020-12-15 - Datos del caso
In Knot We Trust LTD,
WIPO Case No. D2006-0340.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Ownership of a nationally registered trademark constitutes prima facie evidence that the complainant has the requisite rights in a mark for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ...It is furthermore well established that a domain name that wholly incorporates a trademark may be confusingly similar to that trademark for purposes of the Policy despite the addition of a descriptive word or suffix. ...
2020-08-04 - Datos del caso
It is generally regarded as prima facie evidence of no rights or legitimate interests if a complainant shows that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the complainant’s trademark, that the respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, and that the complainant has not authorized the respondent to use its mark (or an expression which is confusingly similar to its mark), whether in the disputed domain name or otherwise. ...It is implausible, therefore, to believe that Respondent was not aware of that mark when it registered the confusingly similar disputed domain names incorporating the NESTLÉ Mark assessed in section 6.A. above. UDRP panels have consistently found that the mere registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a famous or widely-known trademark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith. ...
2020-09-22 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in the KLARNA trade mark, based on its various trade mark registrations.
...The Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s KLARNA trade mark, and accordingly, paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2020-09-22 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in the AUTOCAD trade mark, based on its various trade mark registrations.
...The Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s AUTOCAD trade mark, and accordingly, paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2020-10-20 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name consists of the registered trademark META and the term
“token”. ...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks and
that the first element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2023-02-03 - 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
The Complainant believes the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SOREL
trademark. The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its well-known
trademark SOREL as they incorporate the whole of Complainant’s SOREL trademark. ...It is further noted that the Panel has taken note of the WIPO Overview 3.0 and, where appropriate, will
decide consistent with the WIPO Overview 3.0.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the registered SOREL trademarks
owned by the Complainant. ...
2022-08-30 - 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
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
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.
...Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
7. Decision...
2022-05-27 - Datos del caso