Complainant s trademark and a Google search would have identified the Complainant and its trademark On the other hand the Respondent claims that it had no knowledge of the Complainant until it tried to file its trademark application for ROCKETPAY

has conducted a search using Google s Street View facility that suggests that there is no business named Sanovis at the contact address shown on the Respondent s website Moreover a letter sent by registered mail to the Respondent at that address

The Respondent also purchased Google Ads using keywords tied to the Complainant s products On August 2 2019 the Complainant s representatives sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Respondent using contact information displayed on the Respondent s

Binky Moon LLC Registrars Google Inc EXAMINER The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding Dawn Osborne

Paragraph4 a i see also Google Inc v DktBot.org FA 286993 Forum Aug 4 2004 finding that the complainant had established rights in the GOOGLE mark through its holding of numerous trademark registrations around the world iii See Altec

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 submitted an extract of a Google search in support of its allegation

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

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

search services in the world Google s primary website is located at http //google.com and Google owns and operates hundreds of additional domain names on nearly every top-level country code domain consisting solely of the GOOGLE mark The GOOGLE

Policy Paragraph 4 a iii See Google LLC v Manoj Gupta / Shrish Chandra Yadav FA 1858276 Forum Sep 17 2019 Respondent registered the gmailcustomerservicenumber.us and gmailcustomerservice.us domain names knowing that Complainant had trademark

Google LLC v Ravithra Alahakoon Claim Number FA1909001863617 PARTIES Complainant is Google LLC Complainant represented by Fabricio Vayra of Perkins Coie LLP District of Columbia USA Respondent is Ravithra Alahakoon Respondent Sri Lanka

s commercial benefit Google LLC v Super Privacy Service LTD c/o Dynadot FA 1803232 Forum Sept 25 2018 finding lack of rights or interests based upon use of domain name to link or redirect traffic to unrelated websites presumably for

is registered with Google LLC The disputed domain names are referred to in this Decision as the �Domain Names � and the registrars are referred to as the �Registrars � 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO

according to the Respondent a Google search for �novatela � will show in the first page ten results that reference to �Nova Tela Solutions � a Brazilian Database management company not making the following five pages a single reference to the

name a simple search via Google or any other search engine using the keywords �CARREFOUR � or �BANQUE CARREFOUR � demonstrates that all first results relate to Complainant �s products or news In this day and age of the Internet and advancement

the disputed domain name into Google returns an error as well as a suggestion to �Search Google for rocketpay � 6 Discussion and Findings A Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established registered trade mark rights in the term

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

�ienova � is entered in a Google search engine the only results are said to relate to the Complainant �s trademark and activities The real reason that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name is no coincidence according to the

with a search engine such as Google leads in the first place to websites relating to the Complainant and its products The Respondent has listed the disputed domain name for sale and uses it to resolve to the Complainant �s official Indian website

Name � 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 25 2019 The first amended Complaint was filed with the Center on June 27