{
    "case_number": "CAC-ADREU-005198",
    "time_of_filling": null,
    "domain_names": [],
    "case_administrator": null,
    "complainant": [],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "On 7 April 2007, the Respondent registered the contested domain name. The Complaint was filed on 11 September 2008 and on 19 September 2008 the EURid verified that the Respondent is the registrant of the contested domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent was notified of the Complaint on 22 September 2008. Because the Respondent failed to file a response, the Center issued a notification of Respondent default on 20 November 2008.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of other legal proceedings related to the contested domain name.",
    "discussion_and_findings": "To succeed in its Complaint, the Complainant must show that the requirements of Article 21(1) of the Commission Regulation (EC) No. 874\/2004 have been complied with. That paragraph reads as follows: \r\n\r\n\"A registered domain name shall be subject to revocation, using an appropriate extra-judicial or judicial procedure, where that name is identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right is recognized or established by national and\/or Community law, such as the rights mentioned in Article 10(1), and where it: \r\n\r\n(a) has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the name; or \r\n\r\n(b) has been registered or is being used in bad faith.\" \r\n\r\nArticle 22(10) of the Regulation and Paragraph B10(a) of the ADR rules provide that: \r\n\r\n“In the event that a Party does not comply with any of the time periods established by these ADR Rules or the Panel, the Panel shall proceed to a decision on the Complaint and may consider this failure to comply as grounds to accept the claims of the other Party”.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has provided sufficient evidence that it is the proprietor of the Community Trade Mark registration No 45930 DOKA, which has been registered before the contested domain and which registration is in full force.\r\n\r\nThe mark is identical to the contested domain name.  The Complainant has, therefore, satisfied the requirements of the first paragraph of Article 21(1). \r\n\r\nThe Complainant has further asserted that the domain is not in use, that the Respondent is not known by the name and does not hold any exclusive rights or rights of any nature to the Domain name.\r\n\r\nThese assertions are not contradicted by the Respondent. Should the Respondent have rights or legitimate interests to the domain name, the Panel assume that it would have advised the Panel of the same. As no response was filed, the Panel therefore accepts that the Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests to the contested domain name. \r\n\r\nIn the absence of any submission on the issue from the Respondent, the Complainant has satisfied the requirements of Article 21(1)(a). It is therefore not necessary to examine the Complainant’s assertion of the Respondent’s bad faith.",
    "decision": "For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs B12 (b) and (c) of the Rules, the Panel orders that\r\n\r\nthe domain name DOKA be transferred to the Complainant",
    "panelists": [
        null
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2008-12-09 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "\n  The Complainant is the proprietor of an identical Community Trade Mark registration and alleged that the Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests to the domain name. Because no response was filed, the Complainant's assertion of no rights or legitimate interest on part of the Respondent was accepted and the domain was ordered to be transferred to the Complainant.\n  ",
    "decision_domains": [],
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}