{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102121",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-08-03 09:15:34",
    "domain_names": [
        "ratptravelretail.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "REGIE AUTONOME DES TRANSPORTS PARISIENS (RATP)"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)",
    "respondent": [
        "petek  sarigul"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nSince 1949, REGIE AUTONOME DES TRANSPORTS PARISIENS (RATP) (the Complainant) has been designing, operating and maintaining metro, rail, bus and tramway networks in the Île-de-France region and around the world, via its numerous subsidiaries. With 16 million daily travels, RATP is the 5th largest public transport operator in the world. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of several trademarks “RATP”, such as the European trademark RATP n° 008945966 registered since January 31, 2011, or the International trademark RATP n° 1091607 registered since March 9, 2011.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is also the owner of several domain names containing the trademark RATP, such as <ratp.fr>, registered and used since January 1, 1995 and <ratp.com> registered and used since January 28, 1999.\r\n\r\nThe Disputed domain name was registered on July 11, 2018.\r\n\r\nThe Disputed domain name resolves to a registrar parking page.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed domain name and he is not related in any way with the Complainant. The Complainant points out, that he does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. \r\n\r\nNeither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademarks  or apply for registration of the Disputed domain name by the Complainant.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent has made no demonstrable preparations to use the Disputed domain name. Therefore, the Respondent is not using the Disputed domain name for a bona fide offering of goods or services.\r\n\r\nThe Disputed domain name has been registered on the day of the filling of the corresponding trademark RATP TRAVEL RETAIL. The Complainant contends that it evinces that the Respondent has knowledge of the Complainant and its filed trademark when he registered the Disputed domain name. \r\n\r\nOn those facts, the Complainant claims that the use of the Complainant’s trademark in the Disputed domain name gives rise to the inference that the Respondent ought to have registered the Disputed domain name for its trademark value. \r\n\r\nMoreover, the Disputed domain name redirects to a registrar parking page. The Complainant contends that the Respondent fails to make an active use of the Disputed domain name. Failure to make an active use of a Disputed domain name is an evidence of bad faith. \r\n\r\nTherefore, the Complainant states that the Respondent has registered the Disputed domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark from reflecting its trademark in a corresponding domain name.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the Disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "No administratively compliant Response has been filed. ",
    "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": [
        "Jan Christian Schnedler, LL.M."
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-09-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of several trademarks “RATP”, such as the European trademark RATP n° 008945966 registered since January 31, 2011, or the International trademark RATP n° 1091607 registered since March 9, 2011. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant applied for European trademark RATP TRAVEL RETAIL on July 11, 2018.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is also the owner of several domain names containing the trademark RATP, such as <ratp.fr>, registered and used since January 1, 1995 and <ratp.com> registered and used since January 28, 1999.\r\n\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "RATPTRAVELRETAIL.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}