NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.
PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:
THE COMPLAINANT:
The Complainant contends that the Disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its BOLLORE trademark, as it fully incorporates this trademark. This last element is sufficient to support the finding that the Disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark. Indeed, the mere addition of the generic component “HR” (which refers to human resources within a company), as well as of the component “US” (which is the country code for the USA), before and after the Complainant’s trademark, respectively, does not change the overall impression of a most likely connection with the trademark BOLLORE of the Complainant. As to the gTLD “.com”, the Complainant suggests that it should be disregarded, as per the usual practice.
The Complainant maintains that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed domain name because the Complainant is not affiliated with nor has it ever authorised the Respondent to register its trademark as a domain name, the Complainant has never licensed its trademark to the Respondent, and because the Disputed domain name does not resolve to an active website since its registration.
According to the Complainant, given the distinctiveness and reputation of the BOLLORE trademark, the Respondent registered the Disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark in an intentionally designed way with the aim to create a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademarks and domain names, and this is evidence of the fact that the Disputed domain name was registered in bad faith.
With respect to use in bad faith, the Complainant points out that the Respondent has not actively used the domain name, which is considered as a clear indication of bad faith. According to the Complainant, the Respondent has passively held the Disputed domain name and in this way has prevented the Complainant from registering its trademark as a domain name.
For all these reasons, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent registered and used the Disputed domain name in bad faith.
THE RESPONDENT:
The Respondent did not file a response.
|