{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104524", "time_of_filling": "2022-04-25 09:57:24", "domain_names": [ "adeccony.com" ], "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Adecco Group AG" ], "complainant_representative": "BRANDIT GmbH", "respondent": [ "Lawal Ibrahim" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "The Complainant is one of the world's largest workforce solutions company, based in Switzerland. It born from the merger of the Swiss company Adia (established in 1957) and the French company Ecco (established in 1964), effective as of 1 January 1997. The Complainant has 5,200 branches and 32,000 employees in over 60 countries and territories, including the United States. It offers flexible placement, permanent placement, outsourcing and managed services across all sectors. It places around 600,000 associates into roles daily, enabling flexibility and agility for its clients. In 2000 the Complainant acquired Olsten Staffing in the US, becoming the number one recruitment company in that country with revenues of EUR 11.6 billion. In 2010, after acquiring the MPS Group, the Complainant became the world leader in professional staffing. Since then, the Complainant has kept growing. Its revenue in 2020 was EUR 19,561 million and EUR 20,949 million in 2021.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns an extensive portfolio of trademarks, registered in several jurisdictions, and of domain names, comprising the distinctive term \"ADECCO\" (the ADECCO Trademark).\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered with privacy or proxy service on 31 October 2021, well after the registration of the Complainant's ADECCO Trademark, by Lawal Ibrahim, an individual residing in Nigeria.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name resolves to a website displaying the ADECCO Trademark, related to Complainant's products and services, and containing a form requiring Internet users to enter their personal data. MX records have also been set for the disputed domain name, which suggests that it may be actively used for e-mail purposes.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant sent a cease-and-desist letter and several reminders 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 any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.", "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark, since it incorporates in its entirety the Complainant’s registered and widely known ADECCO Trademark. The mere addition of a geographical term (i.e. the letters “NY”, which refer to the city or state of New York) does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity to the Complainant's trademark.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent has nothing to do with the Complainant, nor has been licensed or authorised 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 by the disputed domain name or owns any corresponding registered trademarks. Both the structure of the disputed domain name and the content of the website associated with the disputed domain name falsely suggest affiliation with the Complainant.\r\n\r\nFinally, the Complainant contends that, given the distinctiveness and reputation of the ADECCO Trademark, it is unlikely that the Respondent had no knowledge of the Complainant's mark when he had registered the disputed domain name confusingly similar to such mark. The content of the website associated with the disputed domain name and MX servers set for the disputed domain name evidence that the Respondent registered and has used the disputed domain name having in mind the Complainant and the ADECCO 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\n\r\nThe Complainant, therefore, requests the transfer of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nNo 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.\r\n\r\nLANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDING\r\n\r\nPursuant to paragraph 11(a) of the Rules, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the language of the administrative proceeding is the language of the registration agreement, subject to the authority of the panel to determine otherwise, having regard to the circumstances of the administrative proceeding. \r\n\r\nUpon the CAC's request for registrar verification, the Registrar of the disputed domain name has confirmed that the language of the registration agreement is English.\r\n\r\nConsidered the above-mentioned provision of the Rules, the principle that the administrative proceeding shall be conducted with due expedition while ensuring that the parties are treated with equality, as well as the fact that the content of the website associated with the disputed domain name is in English, which evidences that the Respondent can understand the language of the Complaint and has been given a fair opportunity to present his case, the Panel determines that the language of the present administrative proceeding shall be English.", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Avv. Ivett Paulovics" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-05-30 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is owner of various registered trademarks, all of them characterised by the presence of the distinctive term “ADECCO”, including:\r\n\r\n- Swiss trademark No. P-431224, registered since 26 September 1996, in classes 35, 41 and 42;\r\n- Swiss trademark No. 549358, registered since 18 August 2006, in classes 9, 35, 36, 41 and 42;\r\n- European Union trademark No. 3330149, registered since 19 January 2005, in classes 35, 41 and 42;\r\n- International trademark No. 666347, registered since 17 October 1996, in classes 35, 41 and 42;\r\n- International trademark No. 901755, registered since 18 August 2006, in classes 9, 35, 36, 41 and 42;\r\n- United States trademark No. 2209526, registered since 26 November 2019, in classes 35, 41 and 42;\r\n- United States trademark No. 5922639, registered since 26 November 2019, in class 35.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also owns multiple domain names, comprising the term \"ADECCO\", among which , registered since 15 May 1995, , registered since 17 May 1996, , registered since 21 June 2002, and , registered since 2 October 2003. The Complainant uses these domain names to resolve to its official websites promoting its products and services. The website associated with the domain name is especially targeting customers in the United States.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant has been incorporated in Switzerland and operated worldwide under the company and trade name Adecco since 1997, and in the United States under the company and trade name Adecco USA since 2002.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant’s above-mentioned rights are hereinafter collectively referred to as the ADECCO Trademark.", "decision_domains": { "ADECCONY.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }