Under these circumstances, the Panel finds it proper and fair to render this Decision in English in this case.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated with supporting evidence that it holds a number of trademark registrations for CASH CONVERTERS in plain simple text which is identical to the disputed domain name, disregarding the generic Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") ".net", which is technically required and can generally be disregarded in considering confusing similarity. ...
2016-07-12 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant is a manufacturer and provider of musical instrument equipment and products and is the owner of the D'ADDARIO trade mark in the USA for its products with first use in commerce recorded as 1974.
...
2017-02-21 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not submit any response to the Complainant's contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
When the ccTLD identifier ".au" and the 2LD identifier ".com" are ignored (as is appropriate in this case), the disputed domain name consists solely of the Complainant's registered trademark SANDRO. ...
2017-05-01 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has rights in the mark MAZARS by virtue of its registered trade marks for that term.
...
2018-03-22 - Datos del caso
The last emails also include an explanation from the Respondent:
“We have added this domain to start a promotional plan for EutelSat for persian languages audiences and positive reason”
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established that it has rights in the trademark EUTELSAT.
The test for confusing similarity involves the comparison between the trademark and the Domain Name. ...
2018-02-05 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Once the gTLD “.xyz” is ignored (which is appropriate in this case), the disputed domain name consists solely of the Complainant’s registered word trademark SKYSCANNER. ...
2020-01-22 - Datos del caso
According to Respondent, he simply registered the disputed domain name because it was publicly available.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
In view of Complainant’s trademark registration, the Panel finds that Complainant has rights in the mark GAS NATURAL FENOSA. ...
2018-04-19 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel holds that the disputed domain name is identical to the REDDIT trademark of the Complainant, and that the requirements of paragraph 4(a)(i) have been met.
...
2018-04-30 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established that it has rights in the trademark HANSARD. The trademark is identical to the Domain Name as it wholly incorporates the mark with no additional elements. ...
2018-04-30 - Datos del caso
The Complaint was filed in bad faith in an attempt to deprive the Respondent of a name to which it is entitled.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Domain Name consists of CAGI and the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com”.
...
2018-04-23 - Datos del caso
Pursuant to Article 21(1) of the Commission Regulation (EU) No. 874/2004 and Paragraph B(11)(d)(1)(i)-(iii) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that:
6. The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right or rights are recognized or established by national law of a Member State and / or Community law.
7. ...
2019-10-14 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name begins with and contains the entirety of the Complainant’s trademarked company name, which is well known in France. ...
2019-02-05 - Datos del caso
On November 1, 2019, Complainant informed the Center that no communications were made between Complainant and Respondent regarding Respondent’s offer to transfer the disputed domain name.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that Complainant has established its rights by way of its Australian trademark registration no. 870169 for the QANTASLINK mark. ...
2019-11-18 - Datos del caso
In light of the present record, the Panel decides not to request a German translation of the Complaint and to conduct these proceedings (and write this decision) in English.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Except for the hyphen and “.com” suffix, the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant's trademarks; the Complainant has thus fulfilled paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2009-04-15 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established rights in its mark TAMIFLU by evidencing its trademark registrations. ...
2007-12-07 - Datos del caso
The fact that the Respondent may have sold the domain name to a third party without reflecting the sale in the WHOIS database, is not (without more) determinative of the appropriate Respondent in the present case, which remains the registrant entity as listed in the WHOIS “Sidney Sivers/Bluecitymaps, Inc.”.
C. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The domain name at issue is identical with the Complainant's CRAFTSMAN trademarks. The Complainant has thus fulfilled the requirements under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2008-04-16 - Datos del caso
Discussion and Findings
In the absence of the Respondent's consent to the relief requested by the Complainant, Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the complainant to prove each of the following elements in order to prevail:
(i) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
(ii) the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii) The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2009-06-12 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s
contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Policy does not require that the Complainant’s trademark is registered for such a right to exist. ...
2006-05-24 - Datos del caso
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name consists of the Complainant’s Mark with the addition of the gTLD suffix “.net”. ...
2011-08-22 - Datos del caso
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is effectively identical to its registered mark GROUPE AXA and confusingly similar to its registered marks AXA, from which it differs only in the addition of the generic prefix “groupe” and the generic top level domain suffix. ...
2011-01-13 - Datos del caso