{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106417", "time_of_filling": "2024-04-09 09:35:43", "domain_names": [ "glownuxe.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "LABORATOIRE NUXE" ], "complainant_representative": "Clémence Touillier (ATOUT PI LAPLACE)", "respondent": [ "Ghazala Manzoor (GlowNuxe Beauty Emporium)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is a French company founded in 1964 and which is engaged in the provision of cosmetics and personal care products. It has acquired the aforesaid registered trademark rights for NUXE. It has come to the notice of the Complainant that the Respondent registered the domain name <glownuxe.com> on February 12, 2024 which resolves to a website with the message “Sorry, this store is currently unavailable”, which implies that the Respondent has proposed to open an online store from which it will sell products that the Complainant provides under the NUXE trademark and the additional word \"GLOW'. The Complainant maintains that this will infringe its NUXE trademark and it has therefore brought this proceeding under the UDRP and seeks the transfer of the disputed domain name from the Respondent to itself. <\/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.<\/span><\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

A. COMPLAINANT<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant made the following contentions.<\/span><\/p>\n

1. The Complainant is a French company founded in 1964 and which is engaged in the provision of cosmetics and personal care products.<\/p>\n

2. The Complainant owns a portfolio of registered trademarks for NUXE including the French trademark for NUXE, registration no. 94 518 763, registered on May 2, 1994 and the European Union trademark for NUXE, registration no. 8774531, registered on June 15, 2016 together with other national and international trademarks for NUXE and derivatives (collectively “the NUXE trademark”).<\/p>\n

3. The Complainant also owns several domain names that reflect the NUXE trademark, such as <nuxe.com> registered on February 27, 1998 and <nuxe.fr>, registered on June 25, 2008, which it uses in its business.<\/p>\n

4. The Respondent registered the domain name <glownuxe.com> (“the disputed domain name”) on February 12, 2024 and caused it to resolve to a website under construction and carrying the message “Sorry, this store is currently unavailable”.<\/p>\n

5. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the LUXE trademark, as it incorporates the entirety of the trademark and adds the generic word “glow”, which invokes the brilliance and shiny aspects of products associated with products for which the Complainant is known pursuant to its trademark and which the Complainant uses in connection with the branding of those products by the LUXE trademark and the word “glow”.<\/p>\n

6. The Respondent has also added to the LUXE trademark the generic Top Level Domain “.com “.<\/p>\n

7. Neither of the aforesaid additions to the LUXE trademark can negate a finding of confusing similarity between the domain name and the LUXE trademark.<\/p>\n

8. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. In that regard, the Complainant must first establish a prima facie case and, if it is successful, the onus of proof reverts to the Respondent to disprove that case.

<\/p>\n

The Panel finds that the prima facie case in this proceeding is established by evidence that:<\/p>\n

(a) the Complainant is the sole owner of the NUXE trademark;<\/span><\/p>\n

(b) the Complainant has not authorized the Respondent to register the disputed domain name or to make any use of the NUXE trademark;<\/span><\/p>\n

(c) thus, the Complainant has never authorized the Respondent or anyone else to use the word “glow” in juxtaposition with the NUXE trademark, especially as the Complainant also uses the word GLOW in association with its own products bearing the NUXE trademark; and<\/p>\n

(d) there is no other ground on which the Respondent could be shown to have a right or legitimate interest in the domain name.

<\/span><\/p>\n

9. The disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.<\/p>\n

That is so because:<\/p>\n

(a) the disputed domain name was registered and has been used by the Respondent fraudently, in bad faith and with the intention of infringing the Complainant’s NUXE trademark;<\/span><\/p>\n

(b) <\/span>the Respondent must have been aware of the Complainant’s rights in and use of the NUXE trademark but, despite that, the disputed domain name reproduces the Complainant’s trademarks, domain names and parts of its company name;<\/span><\/p>\n

(c) <\/span>moreover, the structure of the disputed domain name, incorporating as it does the word “glow”, purports to emphasize a fake link with the Complainant and its well known personal care products;<\/span><\/p>\n

(d) <\/span>the Respondent had actual notice of the Complainant at the time it registered the disputed domain name;<\/span><\/p>\n

(e) <\/span>the intention of the Respondent in registering and using the disputed domain name was to obtain a financial advantage from using the NUXE trademark and to prevent the Complainant from using it in a domain name, with the ultimate intention of trying to sell the disputed domain name to the Complainant;<\/span><\/p>\n

(f) <\/span>the Complainant itself sells personal care products using the word “glow” in conjunction with its NUXE trademark;<\/span><\/p>\n

(g) <\/span>the Respondent registered the disputed domain name through a privacy service;<\/span><\/p>\n

(h) <\/span>messaging servers have been created with at least one IP address, showing that the Respondent intended to register and use the domain name in bad faith;<\/span><\/p>\n

(i) <\/span>the Respondent has intended to use the disputed domain name for phishing and to impersonate the Complainant; and<\/span><\/p>\n

(j) <\/span>the Respondent has used the disputed domain name for a website that is under construction for a “store” which the Complainant intends to use to sell products under the Complainant’s NUXE trademark, which it has no right to do.<\/span><\/p>\n


B. RESPONDENT<\/span><\/p>\n

The Respondent did not file a Response in this proceeding.<\/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 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 name (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 name has been registered and is 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.<\/span><\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Neil Brown" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-05-06 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The evidence has established that the Complainant owns a portfolio of registered trademarks for NUXE including the French trademark for NUXE, registration no. 94 518 763, registered on May 2, 1994 and the European Union trademark for NUXE, registration no.8774531, registered on June 15, 2016 together with other national and international trademarks for NUXE and derivatives (collectively “the NUXE trademark”).<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "glownuxe.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }