WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Accor SA v. Wang Yue Mei Case No. D2019-0849 1. The Parties

The Complainant is Accor SA of France, represented by Dreyfus & associés, France.

The Respondent is Wang Yue Mei of China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name is registered with Chengdu West Dimension Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed in English with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on April 15, 2019. On April 15, 2019, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On April 17, 2019, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the disputed domain name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on April 25, 2019 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amended Complaint in English on April 30, 2019.

On April 25, 2019, the Center sent a communication to the Parties, in English and Chinese, regarding the language of the proceeding. On the same day, the Complainant confirmed its request that English be the language of the proceeding. The Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding.

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent, in English and Chinese, of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on May 2, 2019. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was May 22, 2019. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on May 24, 2019.

The Center appointed Deanna Wong Wai Man as the sole panelist in this matter on June 4, 2019. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7. 4. Factual Background

The Complainant is a multinational hotel group headquartered in France. The Complainant operates over 4,800 hotels in 100 countries worldwide, including in China. In Shanghai in particular, the Complainant operates three PULLMAN-branded hotels.

The Complainant owns a portfolio of trademark registrations for PULLMAN, for instance Chinese trademark registration number 4734292 registered on February 7, 2009 and International trademark registration number 502625 registered on May 5, 1986, indicating inter alia Germany and Switzerland. The Complainant also owns a portfolio of official domain names, such as registered on March 21, 1999 and registered on December 18, 2007. Incidentally, the relevant registered trademarks adduced by the Complainant were successfully registered prior to the registration date of the disputed domain name, which was registered on March 13, 2012. The Complainant submits evidence that the disputed domain name directs to an active website, which contains information on, and images of the Complainant’s hotel located in the Jing An District of Shanghai, China, and offers online booking services. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

The Complainant essentially contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademarks for PULLMAN, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, and that the disputed domain name was registered, and is being used in bad faith.

The Complainant claims that its trademarks are famous and well regarded in the hospitality industry, and provides evidence of its marketing materials as well as prior domain name decisions which state that the Complainant and its PULLMAN trademark are well known. Moreover, the Complainant provides evidence that the disputed domain name is linked to an active website. The Complainant contends that the website linked to the disputed domain name purports to be the Complainant’s website for its Sh