The Complainant’s contentions can be summarised as follows:<\/p>\n
A. Background history<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant is an Italian company founded in 1978 and specialised in the production of machines and systems for the processing of aluminium, PVC and light alloys. <\/p>\n The Complainant has achieved a worldwide presence through joint ventures, distribution and direct sales agreement, accounting for more than 37,250 customers.<\/p>\n In addition to the trade marks mentioned above, the Complainant is the owner of the domain names <mecal.com> (registered in 1997) and <mecal.it> (registered in 2000).<\/p>\n By way of relief, the Complainant seeks to obtain the ownership of the disputed domain name <mecaal.com> on the grounds advanced in section B below.<\/p>\n B. Legal Grounds <\/strong><\/p>\n I. <\/strong>The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant avers that the disputed domain name is identical or, at least, confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark MECAL.<\/p>\n The disputed domain name reproduces the well-known trade mark MECAL with the mere doubling of the letter ‘a’, which is a clear case of typosquatting.<\/p>\n II. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights in the disputed domain name, and that the Respondent has not been authorised or licensed by the Complainant to make any use of the Complainant’s trade mark MECAL nor the disputed domain name. <\/p>\n In addition, the Respondent is not known by the disputed domain name; the Respondent is not making a bona fide offering of goods or services by means of the disputed domain name, nor is the Respondent using the disputed domain name for legitimate non-commercial or fair use.<\/p>\n In view of the above factors, the Complainant argues that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n III. The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith<\/strong><\/p>\n Registration<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant states that the trade mark MECAL is well-known and distinctive. The Complainant further states that, given the distinctiveness and reputation of the Complainant’s trade mark, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name with knowledge of the Complainant’s trade mark MECAL.<\/p>\n Use <\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant avers that the disputed domain name is held passively, and that the Respondent has intentionally used it to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent’s website (paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the UDRP Policy).<\/p>\n The Complainant claims that the disputed domain name is not used for any bona fide offerings. This is evidenced by the Respondent’s use of email addresses bearing the sign ‘mecaal’ to correspond with the Complainant’s customers in connection with payment requests.<\/p>\n In the alternative, the Complainant claims that the Respondent’s aim with the registration of the disputed domain name might be to resell it to the Complainant, which is evidence of registration and use of the disputed domain name in bad faith (paragraph 4(b)(i) of the UDRP Policy).<\/p>\n The Complainant therefore concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. <\/p>",
"other_legal_proceedings": " The Panel is unaware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings in respect of the domain name <mecaal.com> (‘the disputed domain name’).<\/p>",
"no_response_filed": " Complainant´s contentions are summarised above.<\/p>\n No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>",
"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 UDRP Policy).<\/p>",
"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 UDRP Policy).<\/p>",
"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 UDRP Policy).<\/p>",
"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.<\/p>",
"decision": "Accepted",
"panelists": [
"Yana Zhou"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2023-04-05 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant relies upon the following registered trade mark:<\/p>\n • International trade mark registration no. 1286889, registered on 25 September 2015, for the word mark MECAL, in class 7 of the Nice Classification, designating several countries, including USA; and<\/p>\n • EU trade mark registration no. 014579346, registered on 22 February 2016, for the word mark MECAL, in class 7 of the Nice Classification.<\/p>\n (Hereinafter, ‘the Complainant’s trade mark’; ‘the Complainant’s trade mark MECAL’; or ‘the trade mark MECAL’ interchangeably).<\/p>\n The disputed domain name was registered on 3 February 2023 and, at present, does not resolve to an active website (‘the Respondent’s website’).<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"MECAAL.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}