{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108506", "time_of_filling": "2026-03-19 18:21:00", "domain_names": [ "uynsportschina.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Treré Innovation S.r.l." ], "complainant_representative": "Avvocato Ivett Paulovics", "respondent": [ "cheng du yao jue xi ping mian she ji you xian gong si" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

A. Complainant's Factual Allegations <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant is an Italian family-owned sports clothing company with over 70 years of history. For three generations, the Redini family has led the company with a strong focus on technology, innovation, and craftsmanship, establishing the Complainant as a recognized player in the field of technically advanced apparel and footwear, as evidenced by numerous awards and strong international sales. The UYN brand achieved a wholesale turnover of approximately EUR 30 million in 2022. Its functional underwear and technical apparel are widely recognized in the industry. Its UYN products are marketed and sold internationally.<\/p>\n

B.  Respondent's Factual Allegations <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has defaulted in this UDRP administrative proceeding and has consequently made no factual allegations. The Respondent is cheng du yao jue xi ping mian she ji you xian gong si (ceng yao lin), based at the address of alabang okada, Manila, Post Code 0900, Philippines. The disputed domain name was registered on March 2, 2024 by the Respondent, as confirmed by the Registrar. It resolves to an active website. <\/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": "

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

The Complainant's contentions can be summarized as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n

I. The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that it is the owner of the registered trademark UYN in numerous jurisdictions as mentioned above in the IDENTIFICATION OF RIGHTS. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the UYN trademark: i) it incorporates the Complainant's mark in its entirety together with the terms \"sports\" and \"china\"; ii) the disputed domain name differs from the Complainant's official domain name <uynsports.com> only by the addition of the geographical term \"china\". This further reinforces the likelihood of confusion, as Internet users may reasonably assume that the disputed domain name refers to a Chinese version branch, or market of the Complainant's official website; iii) the addition of the terms \"sports\" and \"china” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity. The term \"sports\" directly refers to the Complainant's field of activity, while the geographical term \"china\" is non-distinctive. <\/span><\/p>\n

II. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name on the grounds: i) it failed to demonstrate its rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; ii) the Complainant has no relationship with the Respondent. The Respondent has never been authorized to use the UYN trademark or to register or use the disputed domain name; iii) the Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name; iv) its use cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services, nor does it amount to legitimate noncommercial or fair use.<\/p>\n

Once the Complainant makes out a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to the Respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. If the Respondent fails to come forward with such relevant evidence, the Complainant is deemed to have satisfied the second element. See WIPO Overview 3.0, paragraph 2.1. <\/p>\n

Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy lists a number of circumstances which can be taken to demonstrate a respondent's rights or legitimate interests in a domain name. However, the Respondent has failed to meet that burden. The Respondent did not submit any evidence to demonstrate any of the above circumstances.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the Complainant has proven that the second element required by paragraph 4(a) of the Policy is established.<\/p>\n

III. Bad Faith<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith on the grounds: i) given the distinctive and invented nature of the UYN trademark, it is implausible that the Respondent selected the disputed domain name without awareness of the Complainant and its trademark; ii) the disputed domain name with the addition of the geographical term \"china” is characteristic of cybersquatting whereby a respondent seeks to create the false impression of a regional or localized version of the Complainant's official website; iii) the disputed domain name resolves to a website of a Chinese company offering products entirely unrelated to the Complainant. The use of a domain name incorporating the Complainant's trademark to attract Internet users to an unrelated commercial website constitutes bad faith; iv) by using the disputed domain name in this manner, the Respondent is intentionally attempting to attract Internet users to its website for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

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

No administratively compliant Response has been filed. <\/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": [ "Yunze Lian" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-04-27 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant has provided evidence of its ownership of registered trademark rights in the trademark UYN registered in numerous jurisdictions:<\/span><\/p>\n