{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108885", "time_of_filling": "2026-08-03 10:06:08", "domain_names": [ "durateches.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Hangzhou Great Star Industrial Co., Ltd." ], "complainant_representative": "Lei Zhang (Beijing Chofn Intellectual Property Co., Ltd.)", "respondent": [ "Ford Sarah" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is Hangzhou Great Star Industrial Co., Ltd., a joint stock company incorporated in 2001 under the laws of the People's Republic of China, with its principal place of business in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China. The Complainant is a diversified industrial group engaged in the research, development, manufacture, and sale of hand tools, power tools, laser measuring instruments, industrial storage systems, and related hardware products, and states that it is recognized as Asia's largest hand tool enterprise and one of the world's leading hand tool manufacturers.<\/span><\/p>\n

DuraTech is a brand of mechanic and automotive repair tools owned by the Complainant, under which it offers hand tools, power tools, pneumatic tools, and tool storage solutions manufactured in the Complainant's factories in China and Southeast Asia.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant has been publicly listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange since 2010 and has additionally listed Global Depositary Receipts on the SIX Swiss Exchange since 2022. It reported operating revenue of approximately RMB 14.8 billion for fiscal year 2024 and has been recognized in industry rankings, including the Hurun Research Institute's \"2024 Hurun China 500\" and the China National Light Industry Council's lists of top enterprises. The Complainant also states that the DuraTech brand has an established and growing commercial presence in the United States, evidenced by substantial sales and customer volumes on Amazon in the periods preceding the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n

Registration of the disputed domain name<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name is <durateches.com>, registered on June 23, 2026.<\/span><\/p>\n

First UDRP element – the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name wholly incorporates the Complainant's DURATECH trademark, merely appending the two letters \"ES\" immediately after the mark, before the \".com\" generic Top-Level Domain suffix. The Complainant submits that the DURATECH mark remains clearly and immediately recognizable within the disputed domain name, that the addition of \"ES\" does not create a new or distinct term, and that this constitutes a textbook instance of typosquatting. The Complainant further submits that the \".com\" gTLD is disregarded for purposes of the confusing similarity assessment.<\/span><\/p>\n

Second UDRP element – the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that it has never licensed, authorized, or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the DURATECH trademark or to register any domain name incorporating that mark, and that no commercial relationship of any kind exists or has ever existed between the Parties.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant further contends that the Respondent has no trademark rights in \"DURATECH\" or \"DURATECHES,\" and that there is nothing to suggest the Respondent has ever been commonly known by the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the website resolving at the disputed domain name operated under the name \"Duratech Tool Emporium,\" offering wrench sets, socket sets, pliers, and related tools, accompanied by a logo which the Complainant contends bears visual similarities to its registered DuraTech device mark. The Complainant contends that the website discloses no information regarding the Respondent's identity or its relationship (or lack thereof) to the Complainant and instead presents itself as the Complainant's own official outlet.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that, to the extent the Respondent might seek to characterize itself as a reseller or distributor of the Complainant's goods, such a defense would not withstand scrutiny under the Oki Data criteria, which require that a respondent's site accurately disclose its lack of relationship with the trademark holder and not create the impression that it is the trademark owner's own official outlet. The Complainant submits that the Respondent has done the opposite: it has disclosed no relationship information and has structured the site to give the impression that it is the Complainant's own official store. The Complainant contends that such conduct falls outside the Oki Data safe harbor and instead constitutes impersonation, which cannot give rise to rights or legitimate interests.<\/span><\/p>\n

Third UDRP element – the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the registration of the disputed domain name was a deliberate and targeted act, given the Complainant's longstanding trademark registrations and substantial, growing commercial use of the DURATECH mark, including significant Amazon sales volumes predating the registration of the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the content of the Respondent's website — reproducing the Complainant's mark as its own store name, replicating the Complainant's device logo, and offering the same categories of hand tools (wrench sets, socket sets, and pliers) marketed by the Complainant under the DuraTech brand — places beyond doubt that the Respondent could not credibly claim ignorance of the Complainant or its mark.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the use made of the disputed domain name constitutes bad faith use under paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy, as an intentional attempt to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website and the goods offered on it.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the disputed domain name was registered on June 23, 2026, and that, as shown in screenshots dated July 20, 2026, within approximately four weeks of registration the disputed domain name resolved to a fully built, branded retail website of the kind described above. The Complainant contends that this timeframe is inconsistent with any legitimate exploratory or good-faith registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

The foregoing facts and arguments asserted by the Complainant are uncontested because no Response was filed.<\/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": "

Complainant’s contentions are summarized above.<\/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

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/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": [ "Claire Kowarsky" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2026-08-29 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant relies on its registered trademarks:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Mark<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Territory<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Registration No.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Registration Date<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Classes<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DURATECH<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

United States<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

4,703,103<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

March 17, 2015<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DURATECH<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

United States<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

5,010,834<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

August 2, 2016<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9, 10<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (stylized)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

United States<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6,489,022<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

September 21, 2021<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DURATECH<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

European Union<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

010484855<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

October 3, 2012<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

7, 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (device)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

European Union<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

018876137<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

April 9, 2024<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 20<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DURATECH<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

United Kingdom<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

UK00910484855<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Renewed July 14, 2021; valid until December 11, 2031<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

(comparable UK registration derived from EU TM No. 010484855)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (device)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Singapore<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

40202310736R<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

May 19, 2023<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (device)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Singapore<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

40202310742W<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

May 19, 2023<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (device)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Australia<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2107356<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

July 29, 2020<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (device)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Australia<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2107365<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

July 29, 2020<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DURATECH<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Argentina<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.251.722<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Renewed January 6, 2022; valid until March 2, 2032<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DURATECH<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Argentina<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.251.723<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Renewed January 6, 2022; valid until March 2, 2032<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

DuraTech (device)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Argentina<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.514.703<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

April 8, 2024; valid until April 8, 2034<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The Complainant states that United States Trademark Registration Nos. 4,703,103 and 5,010,834 for DURATECH claim first use in commerce dating from March 9, 2003, and that United States Trademark Registration No. 6,489,022 for the stylized \"DuraTech\" mark claims first use in commerce dating from March 23, 2013.<\/span><\/p>\n

Further, the Complainant operates its business using its domain name <duratechtools.com><\/span>.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "durateches.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }