search for that address on Google Maps Third as evidence of actual confusion and of Respondent requiring money from job applicants exhibited to the Complaint is an email redacted for privacy concerns from a job applicant sent to both Complainant

searching to best describe on Google searching for sail salon for services related to manicure and pedicure Beauty which is related to a noun to describe a quality of a thing or service Rights or Legitimate Interests The Respondent submits that she

a finding of bad faith 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 Complainant

mark and website since 2008 Google analytics showing visitorship over the years and social media presence data regarding the website and users The Panel here finds that Complainant has established rights in the WHOISHOSTINGTHIS mark dating back

domain name in bad faith 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 Complainant

these articles on Page One of Google So To make a long story short If you wanted this domain you should have bought it 10 years ago Obviously this domain has nothing to do with your Business or your Brand or you would have registered the domain

is also highlighted by the Google search results for the query New European College The Complainant has not licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use any of its trademarks and has not permitted the Respondent to apply for or use any

link for example through a Google search or typing directly www.livejasmine.com in the address bar of their browser The Complainants also state that when users enter www.livejasmine.com Internet users are immediately redirected to the

the use made of it see also 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 Complainant

English but after using Google translate to translate each statement of the Complaint it is able to comprehend a majority of the Complaint and as such filed a Response in Chinese against the Complainant s contentions From the response filed

name in bad faith A simple google search or a search on the USPTO website would have notified Respondent of Complainant s rights See Compl at Attached Ex D Furthermore Complainant sent Respondent a letter after it had learned of Respondent s

June 29 2017 On July 5 2017 Google Inc confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the davitahealth.us domain name is registered with Google Inc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google Inc has verified that Respondent is bound

of Policy Paragraph4 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

the case of Gulshan Khatrí v Google Inc O.M.P COMM 497/2016 Tata Motors Limited v Vaidehi Jha WIPO Case No D 2014-1244 F Hoffmann-La Roche AG v P Martin WIPO Case No D 2009-0323 Regarding the element iii the Complainant contends that the domain

mark A simple search using Google or other search engines would also have surfaced the Complainant s products The Respondent s website is used in relation to the commercialization of the Complainant s products The Respondent is clearly trying to

mark Respondent states that a Google search for RUFINO shows the WIKIPEDIA definition as a family name Respondent conveniently fails to point out that definition also states See also ¢ Ruffino a wine producer based in the Tuscany region of Italy

competitors are and a simple Google search would have revealed that the Complainant is the owner of the ORIENTAL TRADING trademark The Respondent s passive holding of the disputed domain names orientaltrading.shop and orientaltrading.store is a

June 22 2017 On June 22 2017 Google Inc confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the neennah.com domain name is registered with Google Inc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google Inc has verified that Respondent is bound by

reputation 7.18 Moreover a Google search for LONGOS and MY LONGOS on Google.cz the Czech version with an IP address in Prague Czech reveals that Complainant s website for LONGOS.COM shows up in the very first spot and throughout the first page

or fair use in any way See Google Inc v Gridasov FA 474816 Forum July 5 2005 finding that the respondent s use of a disputed domain name which may annoy or harm the users in some way is harmful to Complainant as the users may assume that