{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103598",
    "time_of_filling": "2021-02-23 09:17:33",
    "domain_names": [
        "sgcibb.com",
        "sgciib.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "SOCIETE GENERALE"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Laurent Becker)",
    "respondent": [
        "Transfers of Learning, LLC"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant’s contentions can be summarised as follows:\r\n\r\nI. The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is one of Europe’s leading financial services groups and a major player in the economy for over 150 years, supporting 29 million clients every day with 138,000 staff in 62 countries. \r\nIn addition to the trade mark mentioned above, the Complainant states that it is also the owner of the domain name <sgcib.com> registered on 22 February 2000. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <sgcibb.com> was registered on 2 February 2021, and the disputed domain name <sgciib.com> was registered on 2 January 2021. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant avers that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark SGCIB, and that they are clear cases of typosquatting.  \r\n\r\nIn order to substantiate its claim, the Complainant relies on previous UDRP decisions, most notably CAC Case No. 100797, SOCIETE GENERALE S.A. v Afs Inc (Afiandi Benson), in respect of the domain name <ssgciib.com>; and CAC Case No. 100587, SOCIETE GENERALE S.A. v Direct Navigation Data, in respect of the domain name <scgib.com>. \r\n\r\nII. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights in the disputed domain names, and that the Respondent is not affiliated with, nor authorised by, the Complainant in any way. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with, the Respondent. The Respondent has not been authorised or licensed by the Complainant to make any use of the Complainant’s trade mark SGCIB nor to apply for registration of the disputed domain names by the Complainant. \r\nThe Complainant further asserts that the Respondent is not known by the disputed domain names and that the Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain names since their registration. \r\n\r\nIII. The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain names in bad faith\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that, given the Complainant’s trade mark’s distinctiveness and reputation, the Respondent has registered the disputed domain names will full knowledge of the Complainant’s trade mark SGCIB and, therefore, could not ignore the Complainant. The Complainant also contends that the misspellings in the disputed domain names were intentionally designed to be confusingly similar with the Complainant’s trade mark SGCIB. On these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain names in bad faith. ",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is unaware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings in respect of the disputed domain names.",
    "no_response_filed": "The Respondent did not file an administratively compliant Response and did not submit any reply to the Complainant's contentions. ",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade 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 names (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 names have been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).\r\n",
    "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.\r\n",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Dr Gustavo Moser"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-04-11 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant relies upon the following registered trade mark:\r\n\r\n•  French trade mark registration no. 3223420, dated 2 May 2003, for the word mark SGCIB, in classes 09, 16, 35, 36 and 38 of the Nice Classification. \r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "SGCIBB.COM": "TRANSFERRED",
        "SGCIIB.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}