{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107387", "time_of_filling": "2025-03-06 15:13:22", "domain_names": [ "saint-gobain.lat" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "COMPAGNIE DE SAINT-GOBAIN" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "Anonymized representative " ], "respondent_representative": "Anonymized Reprezentative respondent ", "factual_background": "", "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": "

The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.<\/p>\n

In turn, no administratively compliant response has been filed. However, informal email correspondence was sent by a third person to the Czech Arbitration Court on the day of the rendering of this decision according to which the named registrant of the disputed domain name apparently was a victim to an identity theft and had nothing to do with the registration and making use of the disputed domain name.   <\/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).<\/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).<\/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).<\/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. In this context, the Panel has recognized that the Parties uploaded a signed Settlement Agreement on April 14, 2025, when this Decision had already been drawn up, as there had been no previous suspension of this proceeding in accordance with the UDRP Rules; that being, the Panel proceeded to issue this Decision. Also, taking into account that the disputed domain name was most likely registered by a third party without the involvement of the Respondent as the named registrant of the disputed domain name, the Panel has ordered that the Respondent’s name be anonymized before making this Decision available to the public.<\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Stephanie Hartung" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-04-14 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant has evidenced to be the owner of various trademarks relating to its company name and brand SAINT-GOBAIN, including, but not limited to the following:<\/p>\n