The Complainant, Guangdong Qisitech CO., LTD., was established in 2016 and is the registered proprietor and owner of the trademarks associated with the “GEEK BAR” brand. The Complainant has long been engaged in the research and development, manufacture, and global distribution of GEEK BAR disposable e-cigarette products, and has achieved substantial market penetration in Russia, the United States, the Middle East, and Europe, thereby establishing a significant global user base and brand reputation.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name <<\/span>geekbar<\/span>grok.com<\/span>> was registered on July 28, 2025 and is actively used in connection with a website impersonating the Complainant and offering its products.<\/span><\/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": " The COMPLAINANT:<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the GEEK BAR brand was founded in 2016 and is now independently operated by the Complainant and that GEEK BAR is among the most popular lines of disposable vape products on the market. The Complainant states that it possesses substantial R&D capacity, with over 100 senior engineers, and that GEEK BAR products are sold in Russia, the United States, the Middle East, Europe, and numerous other countries, providing services to hundreds of millions of users.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant further contends that the brand has demonstrated strong sales momentum globally, particularly in the UK market, where it has committed £120 million to a new production facility to support UK distribution growth. The Complainant also relies on evidence of influencer partnerships, numerous third-party review videos on YouTube, and historical Google Trends data showing sustained high global search volume for the term \"GEEK BAR\" over the past five years, particularly prior to the registration of the disputed domain name, as evidence of the brand's international recognition and goodwill.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant contends that each of the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its GEEK BAR trademark, as each consists of the trademark in its entirety combined with the term\" grok\", and that the generic top-level domain \".com\" does not affect this comparison.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name because the website to which it resolves display content highly relevant to the Complainant's core business in a manner that makes it difficult for consumers to distinguish genuine from counterfeit sources, effectively impersonating the Complainant or falsely implying sponsorship or endorsement. The Complainant further contends that the Respondent's website fail to meet the Oki Data standard (WIPO Case No. D2001-0903) for legitimate resale, as they lack any prominent disclaimer disclosing the absence of a relationship with the Complainant. The Complainant adds that it has never authorized the Respondent to use the GEEK BAR mark, found no trademark rights held by the Respondent in any jurisdiction.<\/span><\/p>\n Regarding bad faith, the Complainant argues that GEEK BAR is a highly distinctive, coined term with no independent meaning, making it implausible that the Respondent selected this domain name by coincidence. The Complainant further contends that the Respondent's use of the domain name to operate website reproducing the Complainant's commercial presentation is intended to attract Internet users for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion as to source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement, within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy.<\/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.<\/p>\n THE RESPONDENT<\/strong><\/p>\n No administratively compliant Response has been filed by Respondent. It ought to be indicated that the Centre sent of the complaint but nor the advice of delivery thereof was returned to the Czech Arbitration Court. The notice of the Commencement of the administrative proceeding was therefore only sent by e-mail. Yet, the e-mail notice sent to service@geekbargrok.com and to postmaster@geekbargrok.com were returned back undelivered as the e-mail addresses had permanent fatal errors. The e-mail notices were also sent to 738572310@qq.com, but the Czech Arbitration Court never received any proof of delivery or notification of undelivery. No further e-mail addresses could be found on the disputed sites.<\/p>\n The Respondent never accessed the online platform.<\/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": [
"David-Irving Tayer"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2026-07-27 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant owns<\/span> several \"GEEK BAR\" trademarks, registered worldwide, such as:<\/span><\/p>\n\n