{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107471", "time_of_filling": "2025-04-08 13:32:38", "domain_names": [ "shcneiderelectric.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC SE" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "Sanjay Nirwan" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

On March 23, 2025, the Respondent, Sanjay Nirwan<\/span>, an individual located in Delhi, India, registered the disputed domain name <shcneiderelectric.com<\/span>>.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name redirects to the Complainant’s official website <se.com>. Further, MX servers are configured.<\/p>\n

According to the information on the case file, 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.<\/p>\n

On April 8, 2025, Complainant filed the instant Complaint.<\/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:<\/p>\n

The Complainant, which was founded in 1871, is a French industrial business trading internationally. It manufactures and offers products for power management, automation, and related solutions. The Complainant is featured on the NYSE Euronext and the French CAC 40 stock market index. In 2024, the Complainant revenues amounted to 38 billion euros. The Complainant’s group comprises 150,000 colleagues and more than a million partners operating in over 100 countries.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant owns several trademarks at least one domain name, characterised by the presence of the distinctive term \"SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC\". The Complainant contends that a previous panel has recognized its rights in the trademark \"SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC\".<\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC and that the inversion of the letters “H” and “C” constitutes an obvious misspelling of its trademark. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant assert that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name because: the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name; the Respondent has no affiliation, authorization, license or similar with the Complainant; the disputed domain name is a typosquatted version of the Complainant’s mark; there is bona fide offering of goods or services from the Disputed Domain Name because it redirects to the Complainant’s official website.<\/span><\/p>\n

Regarding bad faith registration and use, the Complainant claims that in light of the Complainant’s distinctive trademarks and significant reputation, combined with the use of a misspelling of the trademark and the fact that the disputed domain name redirects to the Complainant’s website, it can be reasonably inferred that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with the Complainant in mind. The registration was therefore intended to take advantage of the Complainant’s reputation with the aim to create a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant. Further, the presence of configurated MX servers indicates that the disputed domain name may be used for improper email purposes. <\/span><\/p>\n

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

RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n

The Respondent submitted a brief response, reproduced here in its entirety:<\/p>\n

\"I would like to respectfully clarify that I have not copied or hosted any intellectual property belonging to any company. If you have identified any such material, please feel free to remove it immediately. The domain in question was registered simply because it was available. My sole intention is to engage in domain trading, and I may consider reselling it in the future if there is interest. There is no other purpose behind its registration or use. If you believe this situation is not appropriate, I would appreciate it if you could let me know your specific concerns or expectations. I am happy to cooperate and address the matter accordingly. Kind regards,“<\/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).<\/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.<\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Claire Kowarsky" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-05-05 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the owner of trademarks consisting of the term SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC, such as the international trademark SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC registration no. 715395 registered since March 15, 1999 and the European trademark SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC registration no. 1103803 filing date March 12, 1999. <\/span>Further, the Complainant’s affiliate Schneider Electric Industries SAS owns at least one domain name consisting of the same distinctive wording SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC, namely, <schneiderelectric.com>, registered since April 4, 1996.<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "shcneiderelectric.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }