{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102001",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-05-21 09:24:37",
    "domain_names": [
        "SECURE-INTESASANPAOLO.COM"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Sandra Lanczová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Perani Pozzi Associati",
    "respondent": [
        "Ciro Migliaccio"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant, Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A., is a leading Italian banking group and one of the top players of the European financial arena, born from the merger of Banca Intesa S.p.A. and Sanpaolo IMI S.p.A. effective as of January 01, 2007.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is among the largest financial institutions in the Euro zone with a market capitalisation exceeding 46.4 billion euro and is the undisputed leader in all business areas (retail, corporate and wealth management) in Italy. Thanks to a network of approximately 4,800 branches capillary and well distributed throughout Italy with market shares of more than 16% in most Italian regions, the Complainant offers its services to approximately 12.6 million customers. The Complainant has also a strong presence in Central-Eastern Europe with a network of approximately 1,100 branches and over 7.6 million customers. Moreover, the international network specialised in supporting corporate customers is present in 26 countries, in particular in the Mediterranean area and those areas where Italian companies are most active, such as the United States, Russia, China and India.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns several trademarks and domain names, all of them characterized by the presence of the distinctive and well-known wording \"INTESA SANPAOLO\".\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <SECURE-INTESASANPAOLO.COM> was registered on March 12, 2018, hence well after the registration of the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark, by an individual identified as Ciro Migliaccio located in Italy.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name resolves to a parking page with pay-per-click (PPC) links redirecting to the Complainant's and its competitors websites.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has sent a cease and desist letter to the Respondent without obtaining any response.\r\n\r\nThe facts asserted by the Complainant are not contested by the Respondent.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "COMPLAINANT'S CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name is almost identical to INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark, as it exactly reproduces the wording “INTESA SANPAOLO” with the addition of the descriptive term “secure”. Considering the banking and financial context in which the Complainant operates, the Complainant retains it undeniable that the disputed domain name will create even more confusion with the business carried out under the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark, as it will be interpreted by internet users as a reference to the safety of Complainant’s internet banking.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent, an individual identified as Ciro Migliaccio, has nothing to do with the Complainant, nor has been authorized or licensed to use the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark or to register or use the disputed domain name. The disputed domain name does not correspond to the Respondent's name, nor is this latter commonly known as \"SECURE-INTESASANPAOLO\". Since the disputed domain name is parked, there is no fair or non-commercial use of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant puts forward several circumstances which, according to it, amount to bad faith registration and use. \r\nFirst of all, considering the distinctiveness and reputation of the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark, it is unlikely that the Respondent had no knowledge of the Complainant's mark at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name. The Complainant alleges, submitting an extract of a search carried out by the same on the well-known search engine Google with the keywords \"INTESA SANPAOLO\", that had the Respondent performed a basic search on Google, he should have yielded obvious references the Complainant. Hence, according to the Complainant, it is most likely that the Respondent registered and has used the disputed domain name having in mind the Complainant and the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark and with the clear intention to take advantage of the reputation of the same by creating a likelihood of confusion between such mark and the disputed domain name.\r\nSecondly, the Complainant contends that the use of the disputed domain name which resolves to a parking page and ultimately redirects to websites related to the Complainant and its competitors is not to be considered a good faith use under the Policy and the UDRP case law.\r\nFinally, the Complainant highlights that the Respondent has never replied to the Complainant's cease and desist letter. \r\n\r\nConsequently, the Complainant requests the transfer of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nNO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.",
    "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": [
        "Avv. Ivett Paulovics"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-06-19 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is owner of a large intellectual property rights portfolio, comprising among the others:\r\n\r\nTHE TRADEMARKS \r\n\r\n- International trademark registration no. 920896 “INTESA SANPAOLO”, granted on March 07, 2007 and duly renewed, in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42, based on the Italian TM no. 1042140, covering also Australia, China, United States of America, Japan, Russian Federation and many others\r\n\r\n- EU trademark registration no. 005301999 “INTESA SANPAOLO”, filed on September 08, 2006, granted on June 18, 2007 and duly renewed, in classes 35, 36 and 38\r\n\r\n- EU trademark registration no. 005421177 “INTESA SANPAOLO & device”, filed on October 27, 2006, granted on November 5, 2007 and duly renewed, in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42.\r\n\r\nTHE DOMAIN NAMES\r\n\r\nINTESASANPAOLO.COM, .ORG, .EU, .INFO, .NET, .BIZ and INTESA-SANPAOLO.COM, .ORG, .EU, .INFO, .NET, .BIZ. \r\n\r\nAll such domain names are resolving to INTESASANPAOLO.COM used as main domain name and website of the Complainant.\r\n\r\nTHE COMPANY NAME\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is carrying on business and providing its services under the company name INTESA SANPAOLO S.P.A., a financial institution resulting from the merger of two banks Banca Intesa S.p.A. and Sanpaolo IMI S.p.A. effective as of January 01, 2007. INTESA SANPAOLO has become a distinctive identifier used in trade which consumers associate with the Complainant’s services.\r\n\r\nThe above-mentioned trademarks, domain names and company name are hereinafter collectively referred to as the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has proved its rights in the INTESA SANPAOLO Trademark for the purposes of the Policy.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "SECURE-INTESASANPAOLO.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}