is registered with Google LLC the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed in English with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on December 22 2021 On December 22 2021 the Center transmitted by email to the

All the results of a Google search of the term BIODERMA are related to the Complainant and its products Furthermore Previous Panels confirmed that the combination of BIO and DERMA is distinctive to the Complainant and its trademark

mark under Policy ¶ 4 a i See Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sept 4 2018 Complainant has rights in the GMAIL mark based upon its registration of the mark with numerous trademark agencies around the world see also

mark under Policy ¶ 4 a i See Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sept 4 2018 Complainant has rights in the GMAIL mark based upon its registration of the mark with numerous trademark agencies around the world see also

its trademark It states that Google searches of 3SHAPE show that the Complainant s website and social media appear as the top results The Complainant therefore asserts that it is inconceivable that the Respondent was unaware of it and its 3SHAPE

at issue google status.com Yu Hsien non use good faith D2000 0641 well known D2014 1040 0003 USA   my-statefarm-app com name postmaster@my-statefarm-app Rules 3 0 4 rockwellautomation co antfinancial-investorrelations mark

by typing FB into the Google search engine referring to the Complainant Given this the Respondent could not credibly argue that it did not have prior knowledge of the Complainant s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed

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

mark under Policy ¶ 4 a i See Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sept 4 2018 Complainant has rights in the GMAIL mark based upon its registration of the mark with numerous trademark agencies around the world see also

ARBITRATION FORUM DECISION   Google LLC v Haim cohen haimcohen Claim Number FA2202001985436   PARTIES Complainant is Google LLC Complainant represented by James R Davis II of Perkins Coie LLP District of Columbia USA.  Respondent is Haim cohen

8 2022   On February 9 2022 Google LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the premierhealthcares.com domain name is registered with Google LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  Google LLC has verified that Respondent

mark under Policy ¶ 4 a i See Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sept 4 2018 Complainant has rights in the GMAIL mark based upon its registration of the mark with numerous trademark agencies around the world see also

as shown by its dominance of Google search results for LA HALLE as well as by the Complainant s extensive media coverage and its many social media followers The Respondent could easily have discovered the Complainant s mark was a famous brand and

would have shown up in any Google search It says that while the disputed domain name was only registered in November 2020 that it has been using its trade mark in the United States for 30 years and that its trade mark registrations pre-date the

and Rewards Services BRS A Google search for the terms sudexo brs exclusively gives results related to SODEXO This clearly shows the confusion between the signs Due to the almost identical reproduction of the Trademark in the Disputed Domain

to Policy ¶ 4 a i See Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum Sept 4 2018 Complainant has rights in the GMAIL mark based upon its registration of the mark with numerous trademark agencies around the world see also

is registered with Google LLC the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on December 3 2021 On December 6 2021 the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a

for shopnovartis in the Google search engine the returned results point to the Complainant and its business activities According to the Complainant the Respondent could have easily performed a similar search before registering the disputed

Respondent had carried out a Google search for the name SERVIER the search results would have yielded immediate and obvious references to the Complainant It is therefore reasonable to infer that the Respondent either knew or should have known that

the disputed domain name See Google Inc v S / Google International FA1506001625742 Forum Aug 4 2015 Respondent did identify itself as ‘Google International in connection with its registration of the Disputed Domain Name and this is reflected in