According to the information provided by the registrar the disputed domain name <intesasanpaolo-app.com> was registered on 19 November 2023.
The disputed domain name does not resolve to an active website as the access to the website is blocked for security reasons.
The trademark registration of Complainant has been issued prior to the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/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": "
COMPLAINANT:
According to the information provided Complainant is a leading Italian banking group. It is among the top banking groups in the euro zone with a network of approximately 3,700 branches. Moreover, the international network specialized in supporting corporate customers is present in many countries, in particular in the Mediterranean area and those areas where Italian companies are most active.<\/p>\n
According to Complainant the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark as it is almost identical to Complainant’s well-known trademark INTESA SANPAOLO with the mere addition of the term “-app”, which refers to a service offered by Complainant to its customers.<\/p>\n
According to Complainant, Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. Any use of the trademark INTESA SANPAOLO has to be authorized by Complainant. Nobody has been authorized or licensed by Complainant to use the disputed domain name. The disputed domain name does not correspond to the name of Respondent and, to the best of Complainant’s knowledge, Respondent is not commonly known as “intesasanpaolo-app.com”.<\/p>\n
According to Complainant the disputed domain name was registered and is used in bad faith. Complainant asserts that the webpage connected to the disputed domain name is currently blocked by Google Safe Browsing because of suspected phishing activity. Complainant submits that its trademark INTESA SANPAOLO is distinctive and well known all around the world. The fact that Respondent has registered a domain name that is confusingly similar to the trademark indicates that Respondent had knowledge of Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n
In addition, the disputed domain name is not used for any bona fide offerings. More in particular, there are present circumstances indicating that, by using the disputed domain name, Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his website. The disputed domain name is not used for any bona fide offerings, considering that the same is connected to a website which has been blocked by Google Safe Browsing through a warning page. It is clear that the main purpose of Respondent was to use the above website for phishing<\/em> financial information or other illicit use of the disputed domain name in an attempt to defraud Complainant’s customers and that Google promptly stopped the illicit activity carried out by Respondent. NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED. <\/p>",
"rights": " 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 Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/p>",
"no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": " Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown 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": " 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": [
"Dinant T.L. Oosterbaan"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2024-03-27 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " According to the evidence submitted by Complainant, Complainant is the owner of multiple trademarks for INTESA SANPAOLO, including the European Union trademark INTESA SANPAOLO, number 005301999, registration date 18 June 2007.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"INTESASANPAOLO-APP.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}
RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n