{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105561", "time_of_filling": "2023-07-12 09:41:10", "domain_names": [ "mews.group", "mews.solutions" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Mews Systems B.V." ], "complainant_representative": "Milos Poplar (Eldison, advokátní kancelář, s.r.o.)", "respondent": [ "Cheng Xian", "Cheng Xian" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant offers a property management system designed to simplify and automate all operations for modern hoteliers and their guests.<\/p>\n

The Complainant is the owner of several trademarks, including the term \"MEWS®” at least since 2014.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain names <mews.group> & <mews.solutions> (hereinafter, the “Disputed Domain Names”) were registered on 3 June 2023 and 4 February 2023 respectively, by Cheng Xian based in China and the websites connected with the Disputed Domain Names resolve either to an inactive site <mews.group> or to a website showing infringing content <mews.solutions>.<\/p>\n

According to Complainant’s non-contested allegations, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the Disputed Domain Names, and he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.<\/p>\n

The Registrar of the Disputed Domain Names confirmed that the Respondent is the current Registrant, and that English is the language of the registration agreement.<\/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 Names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

Complainant:<\/p>\n

First element: Confusingly similar to the protected mark<\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Names are identical to its trademark “MEWS®”.<\/p>\n

Second element: Rights or legitimate interest<\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Names. In this sense, the Complainant indicates that the Respondent tarnishes its trademark “MEWS®”.<\/p>\n

Third element: The Disputed Domain Names have been registered and are being used in bad faith<\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Names were registered and are used in bad faith. Furthermore, the Complainant indicates that the Respondent uses the Disputed Domain Names for phishing purposes. In this line of argument, the Complainant described the following illegal conduct by the Respondent:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The Respondent scamed people into investing in Mews Systems B.V. and have already managed to convince someone to send money as an investment;<\/li>\n
  2. The Respondent tried to recruit people through messages via a Messaging Service Provider;<\/li>\n
  3. The Respondent elaborated a forged certificate signed by Complainant´s CEO to appear legitimate.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The Complainant also indicates that there is similarity between the website associated with the Disputed Domain Names and the website associated with the right holder’s domain name. In this regard, the Complainant indicates that the Respondent uses its trademark on the websites linked to the Disputed Domain Names as well as a copyright sentence „Mews Systems Copyright\" in the footer to confuse visitors that it's genuine.<\/p>\n

    RESPONDENT<\/p>\n

    Respondent did not reply to the Complaint.<\/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). <\/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). <\/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).<\/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": [ "Victor Garcia Padilla" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-08-21 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

    Complainant indicates and provides evidence to be the owner of the different trademark registrations with the term MEWS® such as:<\/p>\n

    - International Registration wordmark MEWS®, Reg. Nr. 1721392, Registration Date: 22 September 2022, for different good and services at Classes 9, 36 & 42. Designated countries: DE, FI, BE, PT, BG, DK, LT, LU, HR, LV, FR, HU, SE, BX, SI, SK, GB, IE, US, EE, MT, EM, GR, IT, ES, AT, CY, CZ, PL, RO, NL;<\/p>\n

    - Czech wordmark MEWS®, Nr. 581404, Registration Date: 8 February 2023 for different good and services at Class 9, 36 and 42;<\/p>\n

    - Czech combined mark MEWS®, Nr. 337252, Registration Date: 19 March 2014 for different good and services at Class 9, 38 and 41;<\/p>\n

    - International Registration Figurative Mark MEWS®, Nr. 1341330, Registration Date: 8 November 2016, for different good and services at Classes 9, 38 & 41. Designated countries: JP, LV, LU, GE, BX, LT, HR, RO, TR, HU, FR, BG, BE, DE, FI, DK, IE, AT, CZ, CY, US, MX, SE, KR, IL, SG, SI, AU, SK, IS, IT, MT, PT, PL, CH, EM, RU, GR, ES, NL, EE, CN.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "mews.group": "TRANSFERRED", "mews.solutions": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }