validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse Exhibit B which is sufficient to prove actual use of the trademark URS Rule 8.1.2.1 Respondent registered the Disputed Domain on 16 June 2022 The Disputed Domain is used for a website advertising and

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   There is no information on the Respondent other than provided by the Complainant as the Respondent has not responded   Legal Findings and Conclusion   Even though the Respondent has defaulted URS

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse which is sufficient to prove actual use of the trademark under URS Rule 8.1.2.1 Determined Finding for Complainant Disregarding the gTLD club the domain name is identical to the Trademark   URS 1.2.6.2

entry with the Trademark Clearinghouse TMCH The registered domain name codesys.site is passively held by the Respondent    Even though the Respondent has defaulted URS Procedure 1.2.6 requires Complainant to make a prima facie case proven by

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse Registrant would clearly have been aware of Complainant's mark when registering the domain name and did so in bad faith for the purpose of selling the domain name registration to Complainant or to a

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

registered in the TradeMark ClearingHouse TMCH on April 16 2014 Additionally the Complainant submits that it owns several domain names including the wording MOBIC such as mobic.info which it registered on July 31 2001 as evidenced by a copy of

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

Data issued by the Trademark Clearinghouse which proves actual use of the trademark URS Rule 8.1.2.1 The Disputed Domain which was registered on 26 November 2020 is used for a website advertising and selling Complainant’s IQOS products as

a declaration by Trademark Clearinghouse   The disputed domain name bnpparibas.earth is identical to the BNP Paribas Trademark with the addition of the suffix ‘.earth The addition of the generic term earth does not eliminate likelihood or

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse and is protected via registrations in at least 48 jurisdictions as set forth in the attached Annex of Rights Registrant is using the disputed domain name in connection with a website advertising it for

ist die Marke beim Trademark Clearinghouse registriert Die Beschwerdeführerin hat eine Claims Notification wegen der Anmeldung des Domain-Namens erhalten Dies belegt dass die Beschwerdegegnerin darauf hingewiesen wurde dass mit der Registrierung

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse.No Although you can use your validated trademark record as proof of use in your URS case you can independently provide proof of use with your URS filing No Although you can use your validated trademark

mark with the Trademark Clearinghouse on October 23 2013 This establishes that the mark is in current use   The disputed domain name bnpparibas.fun is identical to Complainant's BNP PARIBAS mark since it contains the mark in its entirety The

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

Registration and Clearinghouse as well as copy of the Respondent's website    Even though the Respondent has defaulted URS Procedure 1.2.6 requires Complainant to make a prima facie case proven by clear and convincing evidence for

also registered in Trademark clearinghouse on November 26th 2013   Complainant asserts as well that the addition of the new gTLD online does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant's trademark

registered in the Trademark Clearinghouse The Complainant is the owner the domain name deezer.com According to the WhoIs the Complainant registered this domain name on January 29 2004 In addition to deezer.com the Complainant also owns a number

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse and is protected via hundreds of registrations worldwide Further  the domain name  is identical or confusingly similar  to the MONCLER Trademark  because the domain name contains this trademark and only

with the so-called Trademark Clearinghouse which is sufficient to prove actual use of the trademark URS Rule 8.1.2.1     The Examiner finds that the domain name is identical to the trademark since it combines the trademark with a gTLD and so finds

registered in the TradeMark ClearingHouse TMCH on April 16th 2014 The Complainant also owns several domain names including the wording MOBIC such as mobic.info registered since July 31th 2001 The disputed domain name mobic.site was registered on

evidence of use by its clearinghouse SMD file  No No Although you can use your validated trademark record as proof of use in your URS case you can independently provide proof of use with your URS filing No Although you can use your validated

evidence of use by its clearinghouse SMD file  No No Although you can use your validated trademark record as proof of use in your URS case you can independently provide proof of use with your URS filing No Although you can use your validated

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse since October 23th 2013 The Complainant has shown that it has made effective use of this trademark The Respondent has not submitted a response and is therefore presumed to not refute this   As proof of

LIDL mark with the Trademark Clearinghouse This establishes that the mark is in current use   The disputed domain name lidl.gift is identical to Complainant's LIDL mark since it contains the mark in its entirety The gTLD gift may be disregarded

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 The Complaint then goes on to add

LIDL mark with the Trademark Clearinghouse on 23 September 2019 This establishes that the mark is in current use   The disputed domain name lidl-shop.website is confusingly similar to Complainant's LIDL mark since it contains the mark in its

registered in the Trademark Clearinghouse as of December 11 2013 Moreover it is contended in the Complaint that Complainant and its distinctive trademark HELLO BANK are known by a significant portion of the public in several countries through its

Declaration for Trademark Clearinghouse submitted with Complaint   Complainant thus holds a valid national registration of its mark and the mark is in current use  The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's mark  

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse The Complainant stated that the disputed domain toeic.store is identical to the Complainant’s trademark The Complainant further stated that the Respondent holds no legitimate interest in the

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse and that this should serve as sufficient proof of use for the purposes of this proceeding.  Complainant is correct as to the legal significance of the submission of a trademark to and validation of it by

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse   b         Providing a sample of use submitted directly with the URS Complaint   a      Existence of a trademark in which the Complainant has rights and is in current use   Complainant proved its rights

registrada en la TradeMark ClearingHouse TMCH y el Demandado recibió de ésta un aviso en el momento del registro del nombre de dominio en disputa advirtiéndole que éste coincidía con la marca de un tercero En ese momento podría haber

IKEA in the ICANN s Trademark Clearinghouse No rights or legitimate interests The Complainant has to the satisfaction of the Panel shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name within the

a notice from its Trademark Clearinghouse agent informing that the Domain Name was registered in the name of Contact Privacy Inc Customer 1244422423 Complainant alleges that because of the identical match of the Domain Name with the trademark

mark with the Trademark Clearinghouse which is intended to protect trademarks in new global top-level domains and provided a certificate dated September 27 2019 confirming this registration   The disputed domain name pornhub.global was

this mark with Trademark Clearinghouse on July 24th 2015 The Respondent has not submitted a response and is therefore presumed to not refute this   As proof of use the Complainant has submitted a Signed Mark Data SMD file in connection to the

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse since October 23th 2013 The Complainant has shown that it has made effective use of this trademark The Respondent has not submitted a response and is therefore presumed to not refute this   As proof of

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse Exhibit B which is sufficient to prove actual use of the trademark URS Rule 8.1.2.1 Respondent registered the Disputed Domain on 27/01/2020 The Disputed Domain is used for a website advertising andselling

validated by the Trademark Clearinghouse prior to the registration of the dispute disputed domain name As a result Respondent must have been given a trademark claims notice of Complainant's rights in the WEWORK trademark It is apparent that

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse According to a document titled 2018 Year in Review which was published in the Pornhub Insights section of the pornhub.com website in 2018 alone 33.5 billion visits were made to the site and average daily

with the Trademark Clearinghouse clearly states that registrations under public opposition are not eligible for registration with the Clearinghouse see Annex 8 They were allowed to register within the sunrise period although they were in

registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse which is sufficient to prove actual use of the trademark URS Rule 8.1.2.1 Respondent registered the iqos.promo Domain on 04/08/2019 The Disputed Domain is used for a website advertising and selling the

registered by the Trademark Clearinghouse       There is no information on the Respondent other than provided by the Complainant as the Respondent has not responded   Legal Findings and Conclusion   Even though the Respondent has defaulted URS

as well with the Trademark Clearinghouse on September 19 2013   Consequently the Examiner considers that the requirement of demonstrating trademark rights and the usage thereof has been satisfied   URS 1.2.6.2 Registrant has no legitimate right