{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101531",
    "time_of_filling": "2017-05-25 11:13:21",
    "domain_names": [
        "cross-lend.com "
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Aneta Jelenová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "CrossLend GmbH "
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "SKW Schwarz ",
    "respondent": [
        "chashaxiandanxiaohaiwangluokejiyouxiangongsi"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant (CrossLend GmbH) is  a German company in the financial technology sector, founded in 2014 which operates a multinational platform where private clients can invest and obtain credit across borders. The company is active in Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Spain.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <cross-lend.com> was registered on 8 November 2016 and is held by the Respondent. \r\n\r\nThe domain name website (i.e. website available under internet address containing the disputed domain name) currently contains only automatically generated links to various third party content and it also reads “Buy this domain”.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant seeks transfer of the disputed domain name to Complainant. ",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings that relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "The Parties' contentions are the following:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nCONFUSING SIMILARITY\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that: \r\n\r\n- The disputed domain name contains “CROSS” and “LEND” word elements of Complainant's trademarks in its entirety and it is almost identical (i.e. confusingly similar) to Complainant’s trademarks.\r\n\r\n- The addition of the hyphen “-“ adds no distinctiveness to the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\nThus, according to the Complainant the confusing similarity between Complainant’s trademarks and the disputed domain name is clearly established.\r\n\r\nNO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTERESTS\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that:\r\n\r\n-\tThe Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\n-\tThe Complainant has not authorized, permitted or licensed the Respondent to use Complainant’s trademarks in any manner. The Respondent has no connection or affiliation with the Complainant whatsoever. On this record, Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\n-\tFurthermore, the domain name website has been during its existence inactive, containing only automatically generated links to various third party content, which implies that there was no Respondent’s intention to use the domain name for legitimate purposes.\r\n \r\n\r\nBAD FAITH REGISTRATION AND USE\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that:\r\n\r\n-\tSeniority of the Complainant's trademarks predates the disputed domain name registration. \r\n-\tIn a response to Complainant’s cease and desist letter, the Respondent made a proposal to the Complainant to transfer the disputed domain name for a consideration of USD 1 000. Such conduct has been considered in previous cases as an additional evidence of use and registration in bad faith due to the Respondent´s intention to unduly profit from the Complainant´s rights.\r\n\r\n-\tIn addition, the domain name website include a short message “Buy this domain” or “Diese Domain Kaufen”, which both indicate Respondent’s intent to sell the disputed domain name for a profit.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant presents the following evidence which has been assessed by the Panel:\r\n\r\n-\tInformation about the Complainant and its business;\r\n-\tExcerpts from various trademark databases regarding Complainant's trademarks;\r\n-\tScreenshots of the disputed domain name website;\r\n-\tCorrespondence between the Complainant and the Respondent, in particular a letter from Complainant to Respondent (dated 27 April 2017) and Respondent’s response to the same.",
    "rights": "The Panel concluded that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to trademarks in which the Complainant has rights within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of UDRP.\r\n\r\nFor details, see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of UDRP.\r\n\r\nFor details, see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".",
    "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of UDRP.\r\n\r\nFor details, see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".",
    "procedural_factors": "The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "JUDr. Jiří Čermák"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2017-07-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is, inter alia, a registered owner of the following trademark containing a word element \"CROSSLEND\":\r\n\r\n(i)\tCROSSLEND (word), EU Trademark, filing (priority) date 19 November 2014, filing no. 13475629, registered for goods and services in classes 9,35,36, and 38,\r\n\r\nbesides other national (German) trademarks consisting of the \"CROSSLEND\" denomination (collectively referred to as \"Complainant's trademarks\").\r\n\r\nIn addition, the Complainant’s company name consist of the term “Crosslend”, which forms a distinctive part of its company (business) name.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "CROSS-LEND.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}