Supplemental Rules. B. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant’s pending United States trade mark application is insufficient to establish trade mark...
2018-12-24 - Case Details
Confusingly Similar The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to the BALMAIN trade mark in which the Complainant has rights. The only...
2018-03-09 - Case Details
Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant submitted extracts of the BALMAIN trade mark registrations from the official public records of the Trade Mark...
2018-02-14 - Case Details
Confusingly Similar The Complainant has trade mark rights in EYLEA. The disputed domain names comprise the word EYLEA in its entirety. The Panel therefore...
2017-12-14 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns registered trade mark rights in the KAROLINSKA...
2020-06-30 - Case Details
not to admit them to the record. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant owns Australian combined word and logo mark registration no...
2020-05-19 - Case Details
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...
2020-09-09 - Case Details
Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar As is explained in section 1.3 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third...
2021-02-24 - Case Details
independent research under the general powers of the Panel articulated, inter alia, in paragraph 10 of the Rules. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The...
2020-11-06 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has demonstrated its ownership of various registrations covering the OANDA...
2021-01-25 - Case Details
Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar Once the ccTLD “.co” is ignored (which is appropriate in this case), the disputed domain name consists of the...
2020-12-01 - Case Details
demonstrate each of the following: (i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a name, trade mark or service mark in which the...Identical or Confusingly Similar The first element that the Complainant must establish is that the disputed domain name is identical with, or confusingly...
2019-06-20 - Case Details
874/2004 and Paragraph B(11)(d)(1)(i)-(iii) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that: The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a...
2021-08-13 - Case Details
confusingly similar to a trademark or a service mark in which the Complainant has rights Even though the Respondent skillfully contends that the domainDomain...
2001-12-31 - Case Details
fold test specified in Paragraph 4(a). The first of these requirements is that the Respondent's domain name in issue is identical with or confusingly...similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights. There is identity between the substantive portion of the domain name in issue...
2001-12-10 - Case Details
(1) that the Domain Name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights; and, (2...
2002-01-28 - Case Details
confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and, (2) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in...
2002-03-27 - Case Details
directs that the Complainant must prove each of the following: 1) that the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a...
2002-02-06 - Case Details
confusingly similar to a Trademark or Service Mark in which the complainant has rights; and (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of...
2002-03-06 - Case Details
the Domain names and registered by the Respondent, under the name DEKRA-ACL, are identical or anyway confusingly similar to the trademarks and other...
2002-02-11 - Case Details