prove that: (i) The Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and (ii) The...
2001-02-26 - Case Details
6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar As set forth above, the Complainant�s law firm has been known as Shoosmiths or...
2003-01-13 - Case Details
Complaint. The Domain Name is Confusingly Similar to Complainant�s Trade-Marks. The domain name is confusingly similar, if not identical, to the Complainant�s...contested 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...
2003-02-03 - Case Details
designation, making it identical and/or confusingly similar to Complainant�s "Starluck" mark and the "Starluck family" of domain names and common law trademarks...
2003-05-22 - Case Details
are not barred by its alleged delay in taking action. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The disputed domain names are identical to trademarks in which...
2003-07-15 - Case Details
Complainants� contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainants claim rights in N KIDS. To show that they are the...
2003-06-30 - Case Details
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...
2003-08-25 - Case Details
Complaint to be granted, the Complainant must prove each of the following: (i) that the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly...similar to the trade marks or service marks in which the Complainant has rights; and, (ii) that the Respondent has no rights or no legitimate interests in...
2002-08-19 - Case Details
of the Policy. These elements are as follows: (i) Respondent's Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which...
2002-09-23 - Case Details
Dispute Resolution Policy lists three tests which a Complainants must satisfy in order to succeed: (i) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar...
2002-10-24 - Case Details
paragraph 4(a) of the Policy is satisfied, namely that (i) The Domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which...
2002-11-08 - Case Details
(i) That the Respondent�s Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; (ii) That...
2002-11-13 - Case Details
Complainant to prove each of the three elements set out in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, as follows: (i)the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a...
2002-11-25 - Case Details
that on the balance of probabilities:- 7.2 The Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant�s registered trade marks. 7.3 The...
2002-12-17 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Panel decides that the domain name is identical to the trademark SIALGEO. B. Rights or...
2003-12-23 - Case Details
attached to his name. Identical or confusingly similar (Policy, paragraph 4(a)(i), Rules paragraphs 3(b(viii), (ix)(1)) 6.12 The Complainant contends that...of the Policy as follows: (i) The Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights...
2004-03-31 - Case Details
4(a) of the Policy. These elements are as follows: (i) Respondent’s Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in...
2004-11-03 - Case Details
of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that: The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right or rights...
2021-07-26 - Case Details
/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 name in...
2021-07-06 - Case Details
d)(1)(i)-(iii) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that: - the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a...
2021-07-01 - Case Details