Complainant states that it is “a French company, [and the] world’s leading provider in real estate services, providing services to both individuals and businesses”; that it “assists residential and commercial customers at each stage of their property journey with competitive and comprehensive service offerings”; that it “provide[s] end-to-end assistance, from managing individual apartments and building areas jointly owned by apartment owners through our lease management and joint property management business lines, respectively, to providing renting, brokerage and digital and ancillary services such as insurance brokerage, technical diagnostics, and distribution and energy brokerage offerings through our other business lines”; that it “is the leader in France, operating under the FONCIA brand through a unique network of over 500 branches”; that it “also hold[s] leading positions in Switzerland, Germany and the UK and have strong presence in Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Portugal where the company operates under various brands through a network of over 200 branches”; and that it “represents 17,000 employees in 8 countries, over 700 branches that corresponds to €1.5bn revenue.”<\/p>\n
The Disputed Domain Name was created on January 26, 2023, and is not being used in connection with an active website (Complainant also states that it “really fears that the domain name be used in phishing purposes as [it has] had to file many complaints recently against [other] domain names” containing the EMERIA Trademark).<\/p>\n
Complainant contends, in relevant part, as follows:<\/p>\n
Paragraph 4(a)(i): Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the EMERIA Trademark because it “incorporates in whole the Complainant’[s] trademarks for EMERIA,” “[i]t is well accepted that the hyphen is not relevant in the confusing similarity test”, and “the geographical term ‘EUROPE’ after the hyphen has no impact on the distinctive part ‘EMERIA’” because “ [i]t is well established that, where the relevant trademark is recognizable within the domain name, the addition of geographical terms would not be sufficient to prevent a finding of confusing similarity.”<\/p>\n
Paragraph 4(a)(ii): Complainant states that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name because, inter alia, “the complainants have never given any authorization to anyone to make any use or apply for registration of the disputed domain name <emeria-europe.com> and have no affiliation at all with the Respondent”; although the Disputed Domain Name “direct[s] to an inactive page[, w]hat reinforces our conviction is that such inactive page does not constitute a bona fide offer but rather a way to activate in the future MX email servers to send fraudulent emails to third parties in view of money bribing”; and “[t]he respondent has usurped the name of a company in the complainant’s group.”<\/p>\n
Paragraph 4(a)(iii): Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith because, inter alia, the Disputed Domain Name “reproduce[s] the entirety of the Complainant’ marks and company name for EMERIA,” which “confirms that Respondent was aware of Complainant and its trademarks and that it\/he\/she\/they registered the disputed domain name based on the attractiveness of Complainant’[s] trademarks”; “[a]ccording to the registrar verification the domain name is wrongly filed in the name on EMERIA europe and the owner is not an employee of EMERIA europe”; “Respondent is passively holding the disputed domain name”; and “the association of the trademark EMERIA with the term ‘Europe’ reinforces the confusion as the disputed domain name might be regarded in concerned professionals’ mind as originating from \/ linked to the Complainant.”<\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
Complainant´s contentions are summarized above.<\/span><\/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 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 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 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": [
"Douglas Isenberg"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2023-04-08 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " Complainant states that it is the owner of, and the Panel has confirmed, Int’l Reg. No. 1,677,921 for EMERIA (registered March 22, 2022) for use in connection with, inter alia, “real estate agencies” and “real estate affairs,” as well as additional international and French registrations (the “EMERIA Trademark”).<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"emeria-europe.com": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}