{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106810", "time_of_filling": "2024-08-28 11:23:14", "domain_names": [ "adeccon.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Adecco Group AG" ], "complainant_representative": "Thomsen Trampedach GmbH", "respondent": [ "Pragnesh Patel (Ample Infotech)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is a prominent Swiss company engaged in the provision of services for staffing, career development, consulting and related goods and services that operates internationally, including in India where the Respondent is located. It operates in 60 offices and has 1400 employees. The Complainant owns a series of trademarks including the aforesaid trademark for ADECCO and the domain name <adecco.com> which it uses in its business including for its website at https:\/\/ www.adecco.com<\/a> where it promotes its goods and services under the ADECCO trademark. The Respondent registered the domain name <adeccon.com> <\/strong>(“the disputed domain name”) on May 4, 2023 and has caused it to resolve to the website headed Adeccon Technolab Private Limited. The Complainant is concerned that the Respondent has been using the disputed domain name and the website to which it resolves to suggest falsely that it is affiliated with the Complainant and to offer tailored talent solutions in the recruitment sector and related services which are the same as the services offered by the Complainant.<\/span><\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Complainant has instituted this proceeding to have the disputed domain name transferred 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": "

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS<\/span><\/p>\n

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

The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the ADECCO trademark, as it merely adds the letter “n” after the letter “O” of the trademark. Thus, in registering the disputed domain name, the Respondent has engaged in typosquatting which, as has been demonstrated in many prior UDRP decisions, shows confusing similarity with the ADECCO trademark.<\/p>\n

The Respondent has also added the gTLD “.com” which cannot negate a finding of confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the trademark.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name for the following reasons:<\/span><\/p>\n