{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106213",
    "time_of_filling": "2024-01-31 09:23:13",
    "domain_names": [
        "bollorelogistcs.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BOLLORE SE"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Im Love (Bollore Logistics)"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant, founded in 1822, is a French company (the Bollor&eacute; Family), focused on three business areas as Transportation and Logistics, Communication and Media, Electricity Storage and Solutions. The Complainant is one of the 500 largest companies in the world.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant is listed on the Paris Stock Exchange. According to its 2022 Report, the Complainant has more than 56,000 employees in 104 countries, with 20,677 million euros as revenues, an operating income of 1,502 million euros and a shareholders' equity in the amount of 36,568 million euros.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant&acute;s subsidiary BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS is a global leader in international transport and logistics, with presence in 146 countries and more than 15,000 employees. &nbsp;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant also owns the following domain names &lt;bollore-logistics.com&gt; registered on January 20, 2009; and &lt;bollore.com&gt; registered on July 25, 1997.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The disputed domain name &lt;<strong>bollorelogistcs.com<\/strong>&gt; was registered on January 27, 2024 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><strong>Complainant Contentions<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">In relation to the first element of the Policy, the Complainant contends in summary that the disputed domain name &lt;bollorelogistcs.com&gt; is confusingly similar to its well-known trademark BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS, which it has been misspelled in the disputed domain name by the deletion of the letter &ldquo;i&rdquo; [over the second vowel of the word &ldquo;Logist<strong><u>i<\/u><\/strong>cs&rdquo;], which is not sufficient to avoid the likelihood of confusion with the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark and constitutes a clear case of Typosquatting, citing <em>Bollore SE v. Name Redacted<\/em>, WIPO Case No. D2022-2735; <em>BOLLORE SE v. Malcolm Perry<\/em>, CAC Case No. 104261.<br \/><br \/><\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<p>In relation to the second element of the Policy, the Complainant contends in summary that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, since the Respondent it is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, despite the information provided by the Registrar, where the Respondent has been identified as &ldquo;Bollore Logistics&rdquo; (Registrant Organization Name); &ldquo;Im Love&rdquo; (Registrant); located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, US; city where the Complainant has no official business activity and\/or presence; that the provided email is not controlled by the [real] affiliate BOLLOR&Eacute; Logistics USA; that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way; that the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent; that either license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant; that the disputed domain name is a typosquatted version of the trademark BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS, citing The Hackett Group, Inc. v. Brian Herns \/ The Hackett Group, Forum Case No. 1597465 (&ldquo;The Panel agrees that typosquatting is occurring, and finds this is additional evidence that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests under Policy 4(a)(ii)&rdquo;).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<p>In relation to the third element of the Policy, the Complainant contends in summary that given the notoriety and distinctiveness of the Trademark BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS, confirmed by previous UDRP panelists (g.: BOLLORE v. Donald Shillam, CAC Case No. 102031; BOLLORE SA v. JESSICA SAXTON, CAC Case No. 101500; Bollore v. WhoIs Privacy Protection Foundation \/ Anderson Paul, WIPO Case No. D2019-2112) the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in knowledge of the Complainant; that the incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use, citing Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO Case No. D2000-0003 and CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. Dennis Toeppen, WIPO Case No. D2000-0400.<br \/><br \/><\/p>\n<\/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 style=\"text-align: justify;\">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 style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under the Policy 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": "2024-02-26 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Complainant, founded in 1822, is a French company focused on three business lines as Transportation and Logistics, Communication and Media, Electricity Storage and Solutions. &nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant owns the following trademarks:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>International Trademark BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS AND DESIGN, Reg. No. 1025892, registered on July 31, 2009, and in force until July 31, 2029;<\/li>\n<li>International Trademark BOLLOR&Eacute; LOGISTICS AND DESIGN, Reg. No. 1302823, registered on January 27, 2016, and in force until January 27, 2026.&nbsp;<\/li>\n<\/ul>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "bollorelogistcs.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}