the word SEWKIS on the GOOGLE search engine Complainant has adduced screenshots to support these assertions � Complainant submits that the disputed domain name sevvkis.com is confusingly similar to Complainant's SEWARD & KISSEL mark and its

to forbid in Icelandic source Google translate Should bann refer to one of above-listed definitions or being devoid of any meaning the Complainants contend that it does not allow the disputed domain name to escape being found confusingly similar to

is registered with Google LLC the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on June 11 2020 On June 11 2020 the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request

the term avast into the Google search engine the returned results point to Complainant and its business activities see attached printscreen from Google search for the word avast Respondent could easily perform a similar search before

with Policy � 4 c ii see also Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sep 4 2018 concluding that Respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name where the WHOIS of record identifies the Respondent as Bhawana

15 2020 � On July 15 2020 Google LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the ilonza.com domain name is registered with Google LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name.� Google LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by

under Policy � 4 a iii � See Google Inc v Ahmed Humood FA1411001591796 Forum Jan 7 2015 This Panel makes that inference Respondent has actual knowledge of Complainant's mark at the time of domain name registration based on the fame of

26 2020 � On June 26 2020 Google LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the switchcontrollers.store domain name is registered with Google LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google LLC has verified that Respondent

c ii � See for example Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum September 4 2018 concluding that a respondent was not commonly known by a disputed domain name incorporating the GOOGLE mark where the relevant WHOIS

is registered with Google LLC the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on April 27 2020 On April 28 2020 the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a

had carried even a basic Google search in respect of the wordings INTESA and BANCA INTESA the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant The Complainant submits an extract of a Google search in support of its allegation This

сервисом Google Safe Browsing из-за подозрения в фишинге на что Заявитель ссылался в своем предупредительном письме Ответчику от 17

under Policy � 4 a iii See Google Inc v Ahmed Humood FA1411001591796 Forum Jan 7 2015 This Panel makes that inference Respondent has actual knowledge of Complainant's mark at the time of domain name registration based on the fame of

mark under Policy � 4 a i See Google Inc v DktBot.org FA 286993 Forum Aug 4 2004 The mere addition of a single letter to the complainant's mark does not remove the respondent's domain names from the realm of confusing similarity in relation to the

rights in a trademark See Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sep 4 2018 concluding that Respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name where the WHOIS of record identifies the Respondent as Bhawana

the disputed domain name A Google search for sodeoxo exclusively gives results related to SODEXO indicating the common confusion between these two terms Internet users could likely believe that the disputed domain name is owned by or linked to

based on the results of a Google search are not valid 2 Regarding whether the Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name the Respondent argues that a the Respondent is the owner of a business that relates to

that the Respondent purchased Google Adverts using keywords tied to the Complainant 5 Parties Contentions A Complainant On the merits the Complainant contends that each of the three elements specified in paragraph 4 a of the Policy are satisfied in

according to the Whois in the Google search engine most of the returned results point to Complainant and its business activity The Respondent could easily perform a similar search before registering the Disputed Domain Name and would have quickly

had carried even a basic Google search in respect of the wordings INTESA SANPAOLO and INTESA the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant The Complainant submits an extract of a Google search in support of its allegation