{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105815", "time_of_filling": "2023-09-27 09:48:08", "domain_names": [ "cofinogafinance.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BNP PARIBAS PERSONAL FINANCE" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "SOULEYMANE SOULEYMANE (Julia Dubreuil)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

As the Respondent did not file any response to the complaint, the Panel took into account the following facts asserted by the Complainant (and supported by the documentary evidence submitted by the Complainant) and unchallenged by the Respondent:<\/span><\/p>\n

(a) The Complainant is a company which offers a complete range of loans for private individuals to support them in their projects. As a 100% subsidiary of BNP PARIBAS GROUP, and with 96 billion euros of outstanding loans managed and 5,4 million of net banking income, BNP PARIBAS PERSONAL FINANCE is the leader in personal financing in France and Europe through its consumer credit and home loan activities and exploits several trademarks, such as COFINOGA;<\/p>\n

(b) The Complainant is the owner of Complainant's Trademark and large portfolio of domain names “COFINOGA”, such as <cofinoga.com>, registered on 11 September 1996;<\/p>\n

(c) When the Complainant was informed of the registration of the disputed domain name, it resolved to a website offering loan under the name COFINOGA. It now resolves to a parking page.<\/span><\/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": "

THE COMPLAINANT:<\/span>

In addition to the above factual assertions, the Complainant also contends the following:<\/span><\/p>\n

(i) The disputed domain name is confusingly similar Complainant’s Trademark. It contains Complainant’s Trademark followed by a generic term “finance”. Adding such non-distinctive term does not diminish confusing similarity of disputed domain name to Complainant's Trademark;<\/p>\n

(ii) The Respondent is not known by the disputed domain name and is not affiliated with the Complainant or authorized in any way to use the Complainant's Trademark. The Respondent does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Complainant. Moreover, when the Complainant was informed of registration, the disputed domain name pointed to a website offering loans under the name COFINOGA, which compete with the Complainant’s services and now it resolves to a registrar parking page. As a result, the Respondent does not have right or legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name;<\/p>\n

(iii) Given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's Trademark and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark. Furthermore, the disputed domain name pointed to a website offering loans under the name COFINOGA, which compete with the Complainant’s services. Thus, the Complainant contends that the Respondent uses the domain name to divert Internet users searching for the Complainant’s website to the Respondent’s competing website, and to create a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s Trademark for the Respondent’s commercial gain by offering competing services which amounts to the bad faith of the Respondent in registration and use of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

For the above reasons, the Complainant seeks transfer the disputed domain name to the Complainant.<\/span><\/p>\n

THE RESPONDENT:

The Respondent did not provide any response to the complaint.<\/span><\/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 <\/span>Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (\"UDRP<\/strong>\" or \"Policy<\/strong>\")<\/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 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": [ "Michal Matějka" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-10-26 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant owns the International work trademark COFINOGA reg. no. 688493 registered on 2 March <\/span>1998 in classes 35, 36, 39 and 42 (\"Complainant's Trademark<\/strong>\").<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
The disputed domain name <<\/span><\/span>cofinogafinance.com> was registered on 22 July 2023.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "cofinogafinance.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }