{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105324",
    "time_of_filling": "2023-03-30 09:19:25",
    "domain_names": [
        "adeccogroupa.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Adecco Group AG "
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "BRANDIT GmbH",
    "respondent": [
        "John  Finch Adecco Group"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant is the result of the merger of two major companies operating in the field of job placement. In 1957, Adia SA was founded by Henri Lavanchy in Lausanne, Switzerland. A few years later, Philippe Foriel-Desteze founded Ecco in 1964 in Lyon, France. In the seventies, Adia expanded overseas and began a phase of acquisitions. The company tripled in size and started to operate in more than a dozen countries. In the eighties, Ecco becomes France&rsquo;s market leader as temporary staffing becomes one of the world&rsquo;s fastest growing industries. In parallel, Adia&rsquo;s sales top USD 1 billion as it became the European leader. In 1996, Adia and Ecco merged to form Adecco and at that time the company was placing around 250,000 people a day. In the 2000s, by acquiring Olsten Staffing based in New York, United States, the Complainant became America&rsquo;s largest recruitment company with revenues of EUR 11.6 billion. In 2010, after acquiring the MPS Group, the Complainant became the world leader in professional staffing. The Complainant&rsquo;s revenue was of EUR 23,640 million for the year 2022 and of EUR 20,949 million for the year 2021.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Adecco USA, Inc. was incorporated on October 17, 1997 &ndash; with a principal place of business at 10151 Deerwood Park Blvd., Bldg. 200, Suite 400, Jacksonville, FL 32256, the United States of America (hereinafter &ldquo;the United States&rdquo;) &ndash; which is a subsidiary of the Complainant. Adecco USA, Inc. provides recruiting and workforce solutions. The Company offers permanent recruiting, temporary staffing, career advisory, and resource center services. The Complainant serves customers throughout the United States.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant also enjoys a strong online presence via its official websites and social media platforms. The Complainant owns many domain names containing the trademark ADECCO, including &lt;adecco.com&gt; (registered on May 15, 1993), &lt;adecco.ch&gt; (registered on May 17, 1996), &lt;adeccogroup.com&gt; (registered on June 21, 2002) and &lt;adeccousa.com&gt; (registered on October 2, 2003).<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant uses these domain names to resolve to its official websites through which it informs Internet users and potential consumers about its ADECCO Trademark and its related products and services. The website associated with the domain name &lt;adeccousa.com&gt; is especially addressed to Internet users in the United States. Due to extensive use, advertising and revenue associated with its trademarks worldwide, the Complainant enjoys a high degree of renown around the world.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The disputed domain name &lt;<strong>adeccogroupa.com<\/strong>&gt; was registered on <strong>May 20, 2022<\/strong> and resolves to an inactive website.<\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>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": "<p><u>Complainant Contentions<\/u>:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<p>The Complainant asserts that it is the owner of the registered trademark ADECCO in numerous jurisdictions all over the world, including the United States; which in its vast majority predate the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant contends the disputed domain name incorporates in its second-level portion the Complainant&rsquo;s registered and widely known trademark ADECCO in its entirety and a misspelled form of the term &ldquo;group&rdquo; &ndash; the letter &ldquo;a&rdquo; had indeed been added at the end of the word; and that such addition of the descriptive misspelled term &ldquo;groupa&rdquo;, referring to &ldquo;group&rdquo;, would not prevent a finding of confusing similarity to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, due to the Complainant has not licensed or authorized the Respondent to register or use the disputed domain name, nor is the Respondent affiliated to the Complainant in any form; that there is no evidence that the Respondent is known by the disputed domain name or owns any corresponding registered trademarks.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant also contends that the Respondent has used a privacy shield service, masking its identity on the publicly available Registrar&rsquo;s WhoIs, appearing with it, that the Respondent is aiming at hiding its true identity rather than being known by the disputed domain name; that the revealed Registrant&rsquo;s name &ldquo;John Finch&rdquo; does not correspond to the disputed domain name &lt;adeccogroupa.com&gt; or the mentions &ldquo;adeccogroupa&rdquo; or &ldquo;adecco groupa&rdquo;; that furthermore, when searching on popular Internet search engines for the terms &ldquo;adecco&rdquo;, alone or in combination with the word &ldquo;group&rdquo; or the misspelled term &ldquo;groupa&rdquo;, the vast majority of the results directly relate to the Complainant, its website, its social medias accounts or related topics.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant contends that the structure of the disputed domain name reveals that Respondent&rsquo;s initial intention in registering the disputed domain name was to refer to the Complainant, suggesting a false affiliation with the Complainant, its business activity, its group and with its trademark to the Internet User.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name has been passively held, and that there is no evidence showing that the Respondent has been using, or preparing to use, the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or has made a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered in multiple jurisdictions many years after the registrations of ADECCO widely-known Trademark and that the Complainant enjoys a strong online presence, including in the United States; that by conducting a simple online search regarding the name &ldquo;Adecco&rdquo; alone or associated to the term &ldquo;group&rdquo; on popular search engines, the Respondent would have inevitably learnt about the Complainant, its Trademark and business.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith due to, incorporates the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark ADECCO with the addition of the term &ldquo;group&rdquo; and the additional letter &ldquo;a&rdquo;, which, clearly refer to the Complainant, its group and business, appearing with it that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name having the Complainant in mind, with a clear intention of creating confusion.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant contends that disputed domain name is being used in bad faith, due to it has been passively held, adding several factual considerations of bad faith use under the passive holding doctrine; that as previous UDRP panels have held, under such doctrine that &ldquo;the non-use of a domain would not prevent a finding of bad faith&rdquo; (see &ldquo;WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition&rdquo;, section 3.3; Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO Case No. D2000-0003).<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Finally, the Complainant contends that active MX records are associated with the disputed domain name, increasing the Respondent&rsquo;s fraudulent conduct and purposes by impersonating the Complainant.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Response<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Respondent did not reply to any of the Complainant's contentions.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is 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": "<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">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": "<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">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": "<p>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": [
        "María Alejandra López García"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-05-08 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant is a worldwide recognized workforce solutions company, who assists over 100,000 organizations with their talent needs as well as enabling millions of people to develop their skills and exceed their potential. The Complainant has 38,000 employees in more than 60 countries and territories, including in Canada. The Complainant places around 600,000 associates into roles daily, enabling flexibility and agility for its clients.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant owns the following Trademarks:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- Swiss Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. P-431224, registered on September 26, 1996, in classes 35, 41 and 42, and in force until May 9, 2026;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- Swiss Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. P-549358, registered on August 18, 2006, in classes 9, 35, 36, 41 and 42, and in force until March 1, 2026;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- European Union Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. 3330149, registered on January 19, 2005, in classes 35, 41 and 42, and in force until August 27, 2023;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- International Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. 666347, registered on October 17, 1996, in classes 35, 41 and 42, and in force until October 17, 2026;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- International Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. 901755, registered on August 18, 2006, in classes 9, 35, 36, 41 and 42, and in force until August 17, 2026;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- Canadian Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. TMA491482, registered on March 17, 1998, in classes 35, 41 and 42, and in force until March 17, 2028;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- Canadian Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. TMA688583, registered on May 31, 2007, in classes 35, 41 and 42, and in force until May 31, 2032;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">- US Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. 2209526, registered on December 8, 1998, in classes 35, 41 and 42, and in force until December 8, 2028;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">-US Trademark ADECCO, Reg. No. 5922639, registered on November 26, 2019, in class 35, and in force until November 26, 2025.<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "adeccogroupa.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}