site cannot be reached This passive holding confirms the finding that the Respondent lacks any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name The disputed domain name was registered and is used in bad faith Given the Complainant s

in the view of the Panel the passive holding of the disputed domain names also supports a finding of bad faith particularly in light of Respondent s failure to file a substantive response to the Complaint and the implausibility of any good faith

No D2000-0050 Volvo Trademark Holding AB v SC-RAD Inc WIPO Case No D2003-0601 Wal-Mart Stores Inc v Lars Stork WIPO Case No D2000-0628 America Online Inc v Dolphin@Heart WIPO Case No D2000-0713 AltaVista Company v S M A Inc WIPO Case No D2000-0927

and he has engaged in passive holding of the Domain Name for over three and a half years holding the Domain Name to profit from the trade mark of another He used a privacy service and did not answer cease and desist letters from the

del Demandado de uso pasivo o passive holding respecto al nombre de dominio en disputa aunque haya podido estar motivada como alega por su deseo de solucionar amistosamente el conflicto corrobora igualmente la posible existencia de mala fe por su

disputed domain name However passive holding of a domain name can also constitute bad faith Section 3.3 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 states that While panelists will look at the totality of the circumstances in each case factors that have been

Sept 6 2000 finding that mere passive holding of a domain name can qualify as bad faith if the domain name owner's conduct creates the impression that the name is for sale   Additionally Complainant submits that Respondent's registration of the

It is well established that passive use or non-use of a domain name does not prevent a finding of bad faith under the doctrine of passive holding WIPO Overview 3.0 section 3.3 See also Telstra Corporative Limited v Nuclear Marshmallow WIPO Case

Panel finds that in this case passive holding of the disputed domain name does not prevent a finding of bad faith In addition the Complainant contends that the Respondent s incomplete contact information at the time of registering the disputed

s argument that Respondent s passive holding of the Domain Name for several years amounts to bad faith under the reasoning of Telstra Corp Ltd v Nuclear Marshmallows WIPO Case No D2000-0003 Telstra involved a famous trademark which cannot be said

consistent in finding that a passive holding of a disputed domain name can be considered to be use in bad faith where any use of the disputed domain name would give rise to a legitimate concern of damage to the commercial interests of owners of a

being used by the Respondent passive holding amounts to bad faith use Furthermore any future contemplated use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent which contains the OYO mark is likely to mislead the public as to its origin source or

submits that by its passive holding the Respondent is using the disputed domain name in bad faith v The Complainant requests that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Complainant B Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the

non commercial or fair use   Passive holding of a Domain Name can be bad faith   The Panel notes that the holding page attached to the Domain Name asks if Internet users would like to buy the Domain Name   B Respondent Respondent failed to submit

of the domain name through passive holding of the domain name Further Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's trademarks at the time of registration based upon the size of Complainant's business Respondent's other registered domain name

means recycle in Danish The holding company of the Complainant Genan Holdings A/S is the owner of registration No VR 2013 02304 for the Trade Mark in Denmark registered since December 16 2013 The Complainant is also the owner of several domain

DECISION Volvo Trademark Holding AB v Volvo India India Volvo India Case No D2019-2170 1 The Parties The Complainant is Volvo Trademark Holding AB Sweden represented by Anand & Anand India The Respondent is Volvo India India Volvo India India

considered can be regarded as passive holding see WIPO Overview 3.0 under 3.3 Finally although the lack of a formal response by the Respondent as such cannot by itself lead to the conclusion that there is registration and use in bad faith the

No D2000-0050 Volvo Trademark Holding AB v SC-RAD Inc WIPO Case No D2003-0601 Wal-Mart Stores Inc v Lars Stork WIPO Case No D2000-0628 America Online Inc v Dolphin@Heart WIPO Case No D2000-0713 AltaVista Company v S M A Inc WIPO Case No D2000-0927

the trademark of another Passive holding of a domain name containing a mark with a reputation can be bad faith registration and use See Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows D2000-0003 WIPO Feb 18 2000 The Respondent has used a