According to the Complainant, as the Complainant registered its trademark “MERCK MILLIPORE” with the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) on October 16, 2013, the Respondent “therefore received a warning notice from the TMCH when registering the [disputed] domain name that [it] matches the Complainant’s trademark MERCK.” ...With respect to the Complainant’s claim about the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH), the Panel recalls that according to the Complaint the “Complainant registered the trademark MERCK MILLIPORE with the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) on 16 October 2013.” ...
2020-11-06 - Case Details
The Complainant’s registered trademark VIRGIN is registered with ICANN’s Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”) program for the registration of generic Top-Level Domains (“gTLDs”). Among other services, the TMCH provides warning notices to potential domain name registrants when they attempt to register a domain name that matches a trademark registered with the TMCH. ...On June 20, 2016, the Complainant received a notification from the TMCH regarding the registration of the disputed domain name .
The disputed domain name fully incorporates the Complainant’s VIRGIN trademark. ...
2017-03-22 - Case Details
The Panel noted that the Complainant asserted that its parent company received notices from the Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”) regarding the Respondent’s registrations of the disputed domain names , and . ...Copies of email notifications issued by Key-Systems on October 26, 2016 confirming that the said three disputed domain names , and were registered with the TMCH were submitted by the Complainant. The Complainant said it understood from Key-Systems’ statements to mean that because the disputed domain names were registered during the Claims Periods, the Respondent had received notices of the Complainant’s trademark rights from the TMCH. ...
2017-05-31 - Case Details
The Complainant has registered the Trade Mark with the Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”).
The Respondent is Andrey G Ladner, an individual of the Russian Federation. The Respondent did not file a Response, and consequently little information is known about the Respondent.
...Further, in 2014, the Complainant registered the Trade Mark with the TMCH. The TMCH is a repository of verified trade mark information. If a party attempts to register a domain name in a new gTLD which exactly matches a trade mark registered in the TMCH, that party is alerted to the relevant trade mark rights and must acknowledge those rights before continuing with the registration. ...
2015-10-28 - Case Details
The SALOMON trademark is also registered in the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) since July 12, 2013.
The Complainant owns many domain names including its distinctive such as: and .
...Moreover, as the SALOMON trademark is registered in the TMCH, the Respondent was made aware of the Complainant's trademark when she registered the disputed domain name .
...
2015-12-15 - Case Details
No. 154,450), with the Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”) so as to protect it against cybersquatting, meaning that the Respondent persisted with the registration of the disputed domain name despite receipt of a warning notice from the TMCH, and knowing that the registration conflicted with the Complainant’s rights.
...The Complainant was not obliged to, and did not avail itself of this premium-fee “opportunity”. Trademark owners also can rely on the TMCH system of notification of their rights and interests. The Respondent in this case would have received such notification, as the Complainant did deposit its marks with the TMCH. ...
2014-07-07 - Case Details
The Respondent was aware of the Trade Mark before he registered the Disputed Domain Name, as the Trade Mark is registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”). The Respondent would likewise have received a warning notice before proceeding with the registration.
...The Respondent’s knowledge of the Trade Mark is further evidenced by the fact that the Complainant registered the Trade Mark with the TMCH. The TMCH is a repository of verified trade mark information. If a party attempts to register a domain name in a new gTLD which exactly matches a trade mark registered in the TMCH, that party is alerted to the relevant trade mark rights and must acknowledge those rights before continuing with the registration. ...
2016-12-23 - Case Details
To protect their THE LUXURY COLLECTION marks from cybersquatting, Complainants registered their trademarks with the Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”), specifically the Benelux Trademark Reg. No. 781420 for LUXURY COLLECTION and the CTM Trademark Reg. No. 154500 for THE LUXURY COLLECTION. Because these marks are registered with the TMCH, Complainants assert that when Respondent attempted to register the Domain Names, she would have received a warning notice from the TMCH. ...
2016-03-23 - Case Details
Respondent was also notified and warned about Complainant's ADAC trademark: Complainant has submitted evidence to show that registered its ADAC CTM registration with the ICANN Trademark Clearinghouse ("TMCH") on August 27, 2013. Complainant explains that as a result of the TMCH registration and the so-called "Claims Service", any registrant, including Respondent, receives a warning notice when attempting to register a domain name that matches a trademark term in the TMCH. ...Complainant has provided evidence that it registered its ADAC mark with ICANN's TMCH on August 27, 2013, before the Domain Name was registered in May 2014. Moreover, Complainant has submitted evidence to show that Respondent targeted and registered as domain names the trademarks of many other third-parties.
...
2014-10-16 - Case Details
The trade mark CHAPOUTIER was registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse (the “TMCH”). With the registration of its mark with the TMCH, a potential domain name registrant would receive a warning notice when attempting to register a domain name that incorporates or matches the Complainant’s CHAPOUTIER trade mark. Consequently, the Respondent would have received a TMCH notification about the existence of the recorded trade mark CHAPOUTIER but it proceeded despite such notification, which shows that the registrations were made in bad faith. ...
2016-10-26 - Case Details
Patent and Trademark Office
41,43,44
3,020,845
November 29, 2005
The Federal Service for Intellectual Property (Rospatent)
36
379809
May 22, 2009
The Federal Service for Intellectual Property (Rospatent)
37,39
379819
March 22, 2009
The Federal Service for Intellectual Property(Rospatent)
42
60833
March 9, 1978
The Complainants also registered their SHERATON trademark (CTM registration, No.154450) with the Trademark Clearinghouse ("TMCH") which means that when the Respondent attempted to register the disputed domain name he would have received "a warning notice" from the TMCH.
...The Panel underlines that the Respondent received notice of the Complainant's rights from the TMCH when he registered which is another proof of bad faith.
In the Panel's opinion, it is sufficient to establish a bad faith registration under the Policy.
...
2015-05-06 - Case Details
The marks were also registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse ("TMCH").
The Complainants are one of the world's leading hotels and/or leisure companies in the world, with over 1,100 properties in approximately 100 countries. ...D2000-0003) and in view of the fact that these marks were registered with the TMCH. The Panel also takes note that the Respondent appeared to have provided false contact details. The Panel does not find it conceivable that there could be any plausible actual or contemplated good faith use of the disputed domain names that would not be illegitimate.
...
2015-10-19 - Case Details
Its BAYER marks were deposited with the Trademark Clearinghouse ("TMCH").
The Complainant and its subsidiaries own hundreds of domain name registrations containing the trade mark BAYER, including and .
...The fact that the BAYER mark had been registered with the TMCH also lends strong support for the Complainant's position that the registration was made in bad faith.
...
2016-01-05 - Case Details
In further support of the Respondent’s prior knowledge of the Trade Mark is first the fact that the Complainant registered the TMCH and second that the Registry Operator for the “.app” gTLD has on its own initiative extended the “Claims Notice” period indefinitely. The TMCH is a repository of verified trade mark information. If a party attempts to register a domain name in a new gTLD which exactly matches a trade mark registered in the TMCH, that party is alerted to the relevant trade mark rights and must acknowledge those rights before continuing with the registration (for clarity, in other new TLDs this typically only occurs for the 90 day period). ...
2018-12-20 - Case Details
The Complainant’s VOLKSWAGEN trade mark was validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse (“TMCH”), as a result of which the Respondent would have been given a trademark claims notice of the Complainant’s rights in the VOLKSWAGEN trade mark...Moreover, as pointed out by the Complainant, the Respondent would have been apprised by the TMCH of the Complainant’s rights in the VOLKSWAGEN mark when he registered the disputed domain name. Notwithstanding this, he persisted with the registration. ...
2015-03-09 - Case Details
000154450, Registration Date: January 20, 1999, Status: Active; listed with the Trademark Clearing House (TMCH).
Moreover, Complainant has evidenced to be the owner, inter alia, of the domain names as well as which redirect to Complainant’s official websites enabling Internet users to make reservations at Complainant’s Sheraton Hotels and to access information on those hotels and related services.
...Moreover, Complainant contends that Respondent must have received notice of Complainant’s rights in the SHERATON trademark from the TMCH when registering the disputed domain names , as well as .
...
2015-07-23 - Case Details
The Starwood Marks were registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse ("TMCH").
A letter was sent to the Respondent by the Complainant's external counsel on July 8, 2015, notifying the Respondent of the Complainant's rights in the Starwood Marks. ...The Respondent was clearly well aware of the Complainant's rights in the Starwood Marks since he would have received notice of the warning notice from the TMCH. The Panel further notes that the Respondent did not deny knowledge of the Complainant's Starwood Marks when he registered the disputed domain names.
...
2015-11-12 - Case Details
The Respondent also notes that “.app” is a new generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) with a Sunrise registration period and is subject to the protections of the Trademark Clearing House (TMCH). The Complainant’s trademark was listed in the TMCH, and if the Complainant really believed that the disputed domain name was inextricably linked and central to its product and trademark it could have registered the disputed domain name during the Sunrise registration period and before the general public.
6. ...Indeed, as the Respondent rightly submits:
“It should also be noted that .APP is a ‘new gTLD’ with a Sunrise Registration period, and subject to the protections of the Trademark Clearing House (TMCH). (A copy of the TMCH Notice for the Disputed Domain is attached as 2nd Supp. Reply Exhibit 1). Complainant’s trademark was listed in the TMCH, and had Complainant really believed that the Disputed Domain was inextricably linked and central to its product and trademark it could have registered the Disputed Domain during Sunrise and before the general public. ...
2019-03-14 - Case Details
Trade mark
Territory
Registration Number
Registration Date
INGELVAC
International
476084
April 16, 1983
GLYXAMBI
International
1158911
March 20, 2013
TRADJENTA
Germany
DE302011003416
March 16, 2011
SIFROL
International
530682
December 3,1988
JENTADUETO
International
1085648
June 1, 2011
SYNJARDY
International
1199259
February 17, 2014
The Complainant's trade marks INGELVAC, GLYXAMBI, TRADJENTA, SIFROL, JENTADUETO, and SYNJARDY (the "Trade Marks") have also been registered with the Trademark Clearing House ("TMCH").
The Complainant owns multiple domain name registrations including the wordings "ingelvac", "glyxambi", "tradjenta", "sifrol", "jentadueto", and "synjardy".
...When the Respondents registered the disputed domain names, it would have been advised of the claim of ownership of the Trade Marks by the Complainant since they had been registered with the TMCH.
The Trade Marks in this case have no dictionary meaning or significance other than as the Complainant's trade marks. ...
2016-11-22 - Case Details
Complainant had deposited its trade mark with the Trademark Clearinghouse ("TMCH") but Respondent persisted with the registration of the disputed domain name despite having been sent a warning notice from the TMCH of Complainant's trade mark. ...
2015-01-22 - Case Details