{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105424", "time_of_filling": "2023-05-09 09:46:59", "domain_names": [ "pentair333.com", "pentair123.com", "pentair001.com", "pentair3.com", "pentair33.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Pentair Flow Services AG " ], "complainant_representative": "HSS IPM GmbH", "respondent": [ "Chen Cheng" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is affiliated with the Pentair Group, an industry leader in the water sector, which was established in 1966. The group operates across 26 countries with a network of 135 locations and employs over 11,000 individuals. In 2022, the group achieved net sales totalling approximately $4.1 billion. <\/span>The Complainant provides information on its company online at www.pentair.com.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The disputed domain names were registered on February 27, 2023, and April 18, 2023, respectively. These domains have partly been utilized to host active websites that prominently feature the protected PENTAIR device logo and showcase various pictures of Pentair's products.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>", "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 names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

COMPLAINANT:<\/span>

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Trademark. They argue that these domains incorporate the Trademark entirely, and the inclusion of numbers does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity under the first element.<\/span><\/p>\n

Additionally, the Complainant argues that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. Specifically, they state that some of these domains have been used or are being used to operate an online shop that infringes on the PENTAIR Mark. The shop falsely offers a range of goods, including water purifier equipment associated with the Complainant. The Complainant maintains that such usage does not meet the bona fide criteria established in the case of Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc. WIPO Case No. D2001–0903. They point out that the Respondent failed to disclose any relationship with the Complainant. Regarding the disputed domain name \"pentair001.com,\" the Complainant argues that it is not being used for any legitimate offering of goods or services, as it remains inactive. The Complainant further asserts that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names and is not using them in a non-commercial or fair manner without an intent for commercial gain.<\/span><\/p>\n

Finally, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith. <\/span><\/span>They state that the PENTAIR trademark has a long-standing history predating the registration of the disputed domains. The PENTAIR Mark is registered in numerous territories, has been in use for several decades, and is widely recognized and distinctive. The Complainant argues that it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent knew or should have known about the PENTAIR Mark at the time of registration. Regarding bad faith use, the Complainant points out that the Respondent has used or is using four of the disputed domain names to attract Internet users to their website or online location for commercial gain. They achieve this by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Trademark regarding the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent's website or products\/services. Regarding the unused disputed domain name \"pentair001.com,\" the Complainant contends that it is implausible to conceive any legitimate or contemplated active use of the domain by the Respondent.<\/span><\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/span>

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/span><\/p>", "rights": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names are 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).<\/span><\/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 names (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).<\/span><\/p>", "bad_faith": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).<\/span><\/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": [ "Peter Müller" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-06-30 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is inter alia owner of US trademark registration no. 2573714 PENTAIR, filed on April 28, 2000, in class 7 (hereinafter referred to as the \"Trademark\").<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "pentair333.com": "TRANSFERRED", "pentair123.com": "TRANSFERRED", "pentair001.com": "TRANSFERRED", "pentair3.com": "TRANSFERRED", "pentair33.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }