{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108887", "time_of_filling": "2026-07-31 09:59:32", "domain_names": [ "schneider-electrlc.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC SE" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "AURELIE RUER FRAISSE (schneiderelectrlc)" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME IS IDENTICAL OR CONFUSINGLY SIMILAR TO A TRADEMARK OR SERVICE MARK IN WHICH THE COMPLAINANT HAS RIGHTS <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant states that it was founded in 1871 and it 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. The Complainant claims that its revenue amounted to 40 billion Euro in 2025.<\/p>\n

The Complainant refers to its trademark registrations (\"Trademarks\") listed above and to its portfolio of domain names that include the \"SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC\" mark, including <schneiderelectric.com> registered since April 4, 1996.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on July 07, 2026 and is passively held (does not resolve to any active site).<\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its Trademarks. The substitution of the letter “i” by the letter “L” in \"ELECTRIC\" represents a typosquatting practice intended to create confusing similarity between the Complainant’s trademark and the disputed domain name, as confirmed by previous UDRP decisions.<\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the addition of the gTLD “.COM” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark and does not prevent a likelihood of confusion.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Complainant claims the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark.<\/p>\n

THE RESPONDENT HAS NO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTERESTS IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME <\/strong><\/p>\n

While the Respondent is identified as \"schneiderelectrlc\", the Complainant argues that the company \"schneiderelectrlc\" does not exist and that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name under this name to increase the risk of confusion and to unduly justify the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.<\/p>\n

Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s Trademarks or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.<\/p>\n

The Complainant also claims that the disputed domain name is a typosquatted version of the Complainant's trademark. Typosquatting is the practice of registering a domain name in an attempt to take advantage of Internet users’ typographical errors and it demonstrates that the Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

Passive holding of the disputed domain name does not create any rights or legitimate interest of the Respondent.<\/p>\n

Based on the above, the Complainant claims that the second element of the UDRP has been satisfied.<\/p>\n

THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME WAS REGISTERED AND IS BEING USED IN BAD FAITH<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant's submissions on the bad faith element can be summarized as follows:<\/p>\n