Complainant Contentions (summary)<\/span>:<\/p>\nThe Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical to its trademark ANDROS; that the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) ‘.group’ does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark.<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name since the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, in particular given the results of the WhoIs; that the Respondent is not related in any way with the Complainant; that the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent; neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark ANDROS or apply for the disputed domain name’s registration. Furthermore, the disputed domain name has been inactive since its registration, which confirms that the Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use it.<\/p>\n
Regarding the bad faith registration, the Complainant contends the ANDROS trademark is well-known worldwide, in particular in relation to fruit-based products; that the association of the ANDROS trademark with the new gTLD ‘.group’ is bound to create a high risk of an implied connection with the Complainant; that is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.<\/p>\n
Regarding the bad faith use, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity in respect of the disputed domain name, and it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law.<\/p>",
"rights": "
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical 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": [
"María Alejandra López García"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2026-06-03 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": "
According to the submitted evidence, the Complainant owns, among others, the following trademark registrations:<\/p>\n
- International trademark for ANDROS (word mark), Reg. No. 437234, registered on May 9, 1978, in force until May 9, 2028, in International Classes (“ICs”) 5, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33;<\/p>\n
- United States trademark for ANDROS (and design mark), Reg. No. 3134849, registered on August 29, 2006, in force until May 1, 2027, in ICs 29, 30, and 32;<\/p>\n
- European Union trademark for ANDROS (word mark), Reg. No. 002383636, registered on February 07, 2003, in force until September 20, 2031, in ICs 5, 29, 30, and 32. <\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"andros.group": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}