A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in the OANDA 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 OANDA trade mark, and accordingly, paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2020-10-12 - 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
Therefore, the Domain Name could be considered virtually identical and/or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. ...D2001-0110, stating “The incorporation of a Complainant’s well-known trademark in the registered Domain Name is considered sufficient to find the Domain Name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.”
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied the first requirement that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademark, under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy
B. ...
2020-10-29 - Datos del caso
Therefore, the Panel has decided that the language of the proceeding shall be in English and shall proceed with a decision in English.
6.2 Substantive Issues
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Under the first element of the Policy, a complainant must prove that a disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights (paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).
...The test for whether a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark is fairly straightforward and a domain name incorporating the entirety or dominant feature of the relevant mark will normally satisfy the threshold (Britannia Building Society v. ...
2020-03-13 - 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.
...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s IQOS trademark and that requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2020-03-12 - Datos del caso
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
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
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 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
Accordingly, the Domain Name is identical to the Application and confusingly similar to the Trademark.
The Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the Domain Name. ...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.
...
2020-12-04 - Datos del caso
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the SANOFI trademark for the purposes of the Policy and thus paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy thereof has been established.
...The purpose behind the registration appears to have been to attract Internet users to the Respondent’s (commercial) website using a domain name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SANOFI trademark. In other words, the very circumstances envisaged above. ...
2020-12-02 - Datos del caso
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the SANOFI trademark for the purposes of the Policy and thus paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy thereof has been established.
...The purpose behind registration of the Domain Name appears to have been to attract Internet users to the Respondent’s (commercial) website using a domain name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SANOFI trademark. In other words, the circumstances envisaged above. ...
2020-11-30 - Datos del caso
Complainant
Firstly, the Complainant points out that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the registered trademarks in which the Complainant has rights. In fact, the disputed domain name is almost identical to the trademark “CERCAFACILE2ECLISSE” and confusingly similar to the further trademark ECLISSE. ...Many UDRP panels have found that a domain name is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark where it incorporates the complainant’s trademark in its entirety (e.g., F. ...
2020-11-30 - 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 differs from the Complainant’s registered Marks in that the letter “o” is omitted in the Disputed Domain Name.
The Panel is prepared to find that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s WORDPRESS Marks.
It is a long-established precedent that a minor misspelling of a complainant’s trademark, or the addition of generic or other words creates a confusingly similar domain name. ...
2013-10-16 - Datos del caso
B. 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 therefore finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to many registered trademarks in which Complainant has rights. Thus, the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2013-10-14 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This question raises two issues: (1) does the Complainant have rights in a trademark or service mark; and (2) is the domain name identical or confusingly similar to such trademark or service mark.
...Concerning the second issue, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademarks. First, the Respondent’s domain names incorporate the Complainant’s trademarks in their entirety. ...
2013-04-05 - Datos del caso