{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101914",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-03-09 08:56:42",
    "domain_names": [
        "amundisgsssocgen.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "AMUNDI S.A."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Laurent Becker)",
    "respondent": [
        "amundi"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a French company engaged in the finance industry and in particular in asset management. It is in effect an amalgamation of Credit Agricole and Societe Generale. It is one of the largest asset management businesses in the world and is highly regarded. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the registered owner of International trademark No. 1024160 for AMUNDI, which was registered on September 24, 2009 (“the AMUNDI trademark”).\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is also the owner of several registered domain names that include the AMUNDI mark and which uses in its business.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has been concerned about the registration and use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent. The domain name was registered by the Respondent on February 2, 2018 and resolves to an internet parking page with commercial links to the Complainant and its competitors. Accordingly, the Complainant has filed this Complaint in which it seeks the transfer of the disputed domain name from the Respondent to itself.  \r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "None of which the Panel is aware.",
    "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT\r\n\r\nComplainant made the following contentions.\r\n\r\nIDENTITY OR CONFUSING SIMILARITY OF THE DOMAIN NAME WITH THE TRADEMARK  \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <amundisgsssocgen.com> is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s AMUNDI trademark. The AMUNDI trademark is included in the disputed domain name in its entirety. \r\n\r\nThe addition of letters “sg ss socgen” (in relation with the subsidiary SOCiété GENéral) and the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) suffix “.com” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant ‘s AMUNDI trademark. It also does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the AMUNDI trademark. \r\n\r\nPrior UDRP decisions have confirmed the Complainant’s trademark rights.\r\n\r\nThus, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights. \r\n   \r\nRIGHTS AND LEGITIMATE INTERESTS\r\n\r\nThe Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant must first make out a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests. Once such prima facie case is made, the Respondent carries the burden of demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. If the Respondent fails to do so, the Complainant is deemed to have satisfied paragraph 4(a) (ii) of the UDRP.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and it is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant or authorized by him in any way to use the trademark AMUNDI. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor have any business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\nIn support thereof, the Complainant submits that the Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name under Policy 4(c)(ii). \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name points to a parking page with commercial links in relation to the Complainant and its competitors. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant submits several prior UDRP decisions that support the above contentions.\r\n\r\nAccordingly, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nREGISTRATION AND USE IN BAD FAITH\r\n \r\nThe domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the AMUNDI trademark. The Respondent was aware of Complainant and its well-known trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name points to a parking page with commercial links (“PPC”) in relation to the Complainant and its competitors. Thus, the Complainant contends that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor. \r\n\r\nUnder paragraph 4(b)(iv), bad faith may be shown by evidence that \"By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.\" \r\n\r\nAccordingly, the Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith.\r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT\r\n    \r\nThe Respondent failed to file a Response in this proceeding.",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).",
    "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 the Policy).",
    "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 the Policy).",
    "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": [
        "The Hon. Neil Brown, QC"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-04-15 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the registered owner of International trademark No. 1024160 for AMUNDI, which was registered on September 24, 2009 (“the AMUNDI trademark”).",
    "decision_domains": {
        "AMUNDISGSSSOCGEN.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}