{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102092",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-07-18 09:49:07",
    "domain_names": [
        "convalida-dominio-intesa-sanpaolo.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Sandra Lanczová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Perani Pozzi Associati",
    "respondent": [
        "marcone castrano"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant, Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A., is an Italian banking group. The Complainant operates one of the leading banks in Italy and has an international presence in Central-Eastern Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. The Complainant provides its services to millions of customers through more than 5,800 branches, of which approximately 1,100 are located outside of Italy.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of the registered word mark INTESA SANPAOLO in several classes in numerous countries and regions all over the world, including Italy, the European Union and the United States of America.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name has been registered by the Respondent on May 22, 2018 using a proxy service. The disputed domain name currently does not resolve to an active website. \r\n\r\nOn June 6, 2018, the Complainant sent a notice letter to the Respondent via e-mail, notifying the Respondent of the Complainant’s rights in the INTESA SANPAOLO mark and demanding the voluntary transfer of the disputed domain name and the cease and desist of any further potential trademark infringements. According to the Complainant, the Respondent did not respond to this notice letter.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "According to the Complainant's best knowledge, no other proceedings have been commenced or decided in relation to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant considers the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to trademarks in which it has rights. The Complainant claims that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. According to the Complainant, the Respondent does not use the disputed domain name in connection with any legitimate use. Also, according to the Complainant, the Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name. Finally, the Complainant considers that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The Complainant contends that the Respondent knew, or at least should have known, of the existence of the Complainant’s trademarks and registered the disputed domain name for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the Complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of the Complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of the Respondent’s documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the disputed domain name. The Complainant further contends that the Respondent has likely registered the disputed domain name for the purpose of “phishing” or other illicit use and that there is no plausible legitimate future use of the disputed domain name possible.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.\r\n",
    "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": [
        "Flip Petillion"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-08-22 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the holder of trademark rights for the word mark INTESA SANPAOLO, registered in numerous jurisdictions throughout the world (e.g. international trademark registration No. 920896 since March 7, 2007, covering products and services in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42; and EU trademark registration No. 5301999 since June 18, 2007, covering products and services in classes 35, 36 and 38).",
    "decision_domains": {
        "CONVALIDA-DOMINIO-INTESA-SANPAOLO.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}