FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant is a long-established Swiss premium chocolate manufacturer (founded 1845), operating globally with extensive production and distribution facilities, 12 factories, over 40 subsidiaries, approximately 100 distributors, over 600 retail stores, and a workforce of over 15,000 employees. The Complainant reported sales of CHF 5.92 billion in 2025. The Complainant has grown internationally through acquisitions. Notably, the Complainant acquired the Russell Stover business (then known as Russell Stover Candies, LLC) and its eponymous brand in 2014 for approximately USD 1.6 billion in a widely reported transaction. Russell Stover is a historic chocolatier, founded 1923, and is now a division of the Complainant’s group following such acquisition, producing chocolates at three factories in the United States of America and selling through retail locations. The division generated USD 377 million in sales in 2024.<\/p>\n
The Complainant owns extensive global trademark rights in RUSSELL STOVER and operates key domain names, including <russellstover.com>, used for over 20 years to promote its products and brand. The said brand has an established online and social media presence with tens of thousands of followers across Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn.<\/p>\n
The Complainant has successfully enforced its rights in prior domain name dispute proceedings involving the RUSSELL STOVER mark.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain names were registered on the following dates and at the following times:<\/p>\n
<russellstoversz.com> on April 20, 2026 at 10:56:19 (UTC);<\/p>\n
<russellstovershopz.com> on May 4, 2026 at 11:26:12 (UTC); and<\/p>\n
<russellstroover.com> on May 4, 2026 at 13:44:42 (UTC), being just under two and a half hours after the registration of the disputed domain name <russellstovershopz.com>.<\/p>\n
All of the disputed domain names are registered through the same accredited registrar, namely PDR Ltd. d\/b\/a PublicDomainRegistry.com.<\/p>\n
The websites associated with the disputed domain names (now taken down) feature the same general appearance. Those associated with <russellstoversz.com> and <russellstovershopz.com> are nearly identical. That associated with <russellstroover.com> is similar, featuring the same tan-coloured bar at the top with navigational headings, sign-in functionality in the top-right corner, and references to payment card providers in the footer section of the website. All such websites bear to be official websites of the Complainant when they are not.<\/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 names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
Complainant:<\/p>\n
As a preliminary matter, the Complainant requests consolidation of the nominally different Respondents in the present proceeding on the basis that the disputed domain names are subject to common control and that consolidation would be fair, equitable, and procedurally efficient, noting that the websites associated with <russellstoversz.com> and <russellstovershopz.com> are nearly identical, while the website associated with <russellstroover.com> is substantially similar, that there is a close temporal proximity between the registration of <russellstroover.com> and <russellstovershopz.com> and a temporal proximity of less than a month between all three disputed domain names, that the disputed domain names use the same accredited registrar, that there is a similarity in naming conventions, that the Respondents are nominally based in China but with sparse identifying information and free e-mail addresses following a similar naming convention, and that all three websites associated with the disputed domain names were used for substantially the same purpose.<\/p>\n
The Complainant submits that it satisfies the identity\/confusing similarity requirement of the first element of the Policy, noting that the disputed domain names each incorporate the Complainant’s RUSSELL STOVER trademark in a manner that renders the mark clearly recognizable in side-by-side comparisons. The Complainant notes that the disputed domain name <russellstovershopz.com> incorporates the said trademark in its entirety together with the additional term “shop” and the letter “z”, that the disputed domain name <russellstoversz.com> consists of the said trademark with the mere addition of the letters “s” and “z”, and that the disputed domain name <russellstroover.com> constitutes a misspelling and typographical variation of the said trademark, by insertion of the letters “ro” between the “t” and “o” of the mark, noting that such additions and misspelling are insufficient to dispel confusing similarity under the Policy.<\/p>\n
The Complainant submits, that to its knowledge, the Respondent does not have trademark rights corresponding to the disputed domain names, and has not used or prepared to use them in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. The Complainant also contends that the websites associated with the disputed domain names originally presented themselves as, and created the false impression that they were, official online stores of the Complainant when they were not, using a highly similar appearance to the Complainant’s official site. The Complainant adds that the Respondent has not made a bona fide or fair use of the disputed domain names as a reseller under the cumulative Oki Data criteria, notably failing to provide a clear and sufficiently prominent disclaimer on the associated websites, actively misrepresenting the Complainant as the operator thereof, and featuring copyright statements referencing the Complainant’s legal entity, or in the case of the disputed domain name <russellstroover.com> referencing a “Premium Artisan Chocolate” generic identity. The Complainant argues that the composition of the disputed domain names creates a high risk of implied affiliation and does not constitute fair use, adding that the sites’ inactivity following takedown cannot cure the Respondents’ prior abusive use.<\/p>\n
The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain names were registered and have been used in bad faith because they incorporate the Complainant’s RUSSELL STOVER mark with only minor additions, said mark is of a longstanding nature and internationally recognized (whereby the Respondent must have been aware of it), the websites associated with the disputed domain names have been used to impersonate the Complainant’s official online store including branding, logo and product images, the said sites offered products purporting to be those of the Complainant at heavily discounted prices, they misleadingly sought personal data from customers under the Complainant’s identity which may suggest phishing activity, and they also provided no disclaimer concerning non-affiliation and instead published misleading footer statements.<\/p>\n
Respondent:<\/p>\n
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>", "rights": "
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names are 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 names (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 names have been registered and are 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": [ "Andrew Lothian" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-06-24 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the owner of multiple registered trademarks for RUSSELL STOVER including, for example:<\/p>\n
United States of America Registered Trademark Number 739454 for the word mark RUSSELL STOVER, registered on October 16, 1962; and<\/p>\n
International Registered Trademark Number 1243266 for the word mark RUSSELL STOVER, registered on January 28, 2015, and designated in respect of multiple territories including China, where the Respondents are apparently based.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "russellstovershopz.com": "TRANSFERRED", "russellstoversz.com": "TRANSFERRED", "russellstroover.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }