{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106524",
    "time_of_filling": "2024-05-13 10:44:11",
    "domain_names": [
        "oscaro.online"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "OSCARO.COM"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Domain Name Privacy Inc"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p><span>The Complainant sells since 2001 new and original automotive spare parts as well as used automotive spare parts and car accessories to consumers through its websites and app. The Complainant has a strong reputation in the automotive spare parts market and is part of Parts Holding Europe Group, a European leader in the sale of auto parts which is owned by D&rsquo;Ieteren Group SA.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Complainant has registered 372 domain names, notably domain names containing the term &ldquo;OSCARO&rdquo;, in particular &lt;oscaro.com&gt;, registered since 8 March 2000 which it has operated for many years in connection with the sale of automotive spare parts. The Complainant operates through several websites, such as &lt;https:\/\/www.oscaro.com\/&gt;; &lt;https:\/\/www.oscaro.es&gt;; &lt;https:\/\/www.oscaro.be&gt;; &lt;https:\/\/www.oscaro.de&gt;; &lt;https:\/\/www.oscaro.pt&gt;.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The disputed domain name was registered on 26 March 2024 and redirects to a parking page containing commercial links. The disputed domain name has been offered for sale for USD 2,888. MX servers are configured in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>The Registrar confirmed that the Respondent is the current registrant of the disputed domain name, and that the language of the registration agreement is English.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The Respondent has not filed a Response.<\/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>No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant made the following contentions:<\/p>\n<p>A. The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks as it contains the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark in its entirety, without addition or deletion, as well as its corporate name. Therefore, the disputed domain name is very likely to generate a significant likelihood of confusion in the mind of the public, which will think that the disputed domain name is derived from, or at least related to the trademarks owned by the Complainant. Besides, it is well established that the TLD is viewed as a standard registration requirement and as such is disregarded.<\/p>\n<p>B. The Complainant suggests it has made a prima facie case that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the disputed domain name. The Complainant further asserts that the Respondent: (i) is not identified in the Whois database as the disputed domain name; (ii) is not related in any way with the Complainant; (iii) has no business with the Complainant; and (iv) has not been granted any license or authorization to the Complainant's trademark. Besides, the disputed domain name resolves to an index page. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has not used the disputed domain name since its registration, and it confirms that the Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use it, which further demonstrates the Respondent&rsquo;s lack of legitimate interest in the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p>C. The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is identical to its trademark OSCARO. The Complainant further contends that the Respondent knew about the Complainant and its rights at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name. 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 trademarks and rights.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the disputed domain name points to a parking page with commercial links, whereas the Complainant emphasizes that according to the browsing history, some of these commercial links can refer to direct competitors of the Complainant specialized in the sale of automotive accessories and products. The Complainant contends the Respondent has attempted to attract Internet users for commercial gain to his own website thanks to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks for its own commercial gain. Moreover, the disputed domain name is offered for sale for USD 2,888. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name only in order to sell it back for out-of-pockets costs, which evinces bad faith registration and use. Finally, the disputed domain name has been set up with MX records which suggests that it may be actively used for e-mail purposes.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>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).<\/p>",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "<p>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>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>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": [
        "Vojtěch Chloupek"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-07-08 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p><span>The Complainant submitted evidence that it is the registered owner of the following trademark registrations:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>- French word trademark &ldquo;OSCARO&rdquo; No. 3230038 registered since 11 June 2003;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>- European figurative trademark &ldquo;OSCARO&rdquo; No. 018457859 registered since 28 December 2021;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>- international trademark registration for the word &ldquo;OSCARO&rdquo; No. 950157 registered since 17 August 2007;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>- international trademark registration for the logo &ldquo;OSCARO&rdquo; No. 1105585 registered since 27 October 2011.<\/span><\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "oscaro.online": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}