WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Unicareer (Shanghai) Education Technology Co., Ltd. v. Navigation International Pty Ltd, Linghang Education Case No. DAU2019-0001 1. The Parties

The Complainant is Unicareer (Shanghai) Education Technology Co., Ltd. of Shanghai, China, represented by Beijing Chofn Intellectual Property Agency Co. Ltd, China.

The Respondent is Navigation International Pty Ltd, Linghang Education, of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name is registered with GoD, LLC. 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on January 7, 2019. On the same day, the Center transmitted by email to GoD, LLC a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. The following day, GoD, LLC transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant, providing the contact details and confirming that the Registration Agreement is in English. On January 16, 2019, the Center requested that the Complainant amend the Complaint. The Complainant submitted an amended Complaint on January 18, 2019.

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

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on January 21, 2019. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was February 10, 2019. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on February 12, 2019.

The Center appointed Matthew Kennedy as the sole panelist in this matter on February 15, 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 Chinese company that operates an e-learning career development platform for international students and working professionals. The Complainant registered the domain name on October 27, 2006 that it uses in connection with an official website in Chinese, where it provides online courses and information about itself. One of its courses relates to the qualification to become a CFA (i.e., a Chartered Financial Analyst). The Complainant obtained a business licence in China on December 25, 2014. During the period from March 2015 to October 2018, the Complainant filed six applications for Chinese trademark registrations, five for different devices each including the term “unicareer”, one for UNICAREER, and all specifying services in class 41. Two applications (both for device marks) were refused and the other four applications are awaiting examination. The Complainant also registered the domain names and on March 18, 2016 and March 25, 2016, respectively, and uses them in connection with an official website in English. In July 2016 and July 2017, the Complainant announced that it had successfully obtained financing of CNY 30 million and CNY 50 million, which was reported by Chinese news media, including Xinhua and S Online. The Complainant filed Australian trademark application number 1977711 for UNICAREER on December 25, 2018, specifying services in classes 35, 41 and 42. At the date of this decision, that trademark application is awaiting examination.

The Respondent is an Australian company named “Navigation International Pty Ltd”. Its registrant contact name in the WhoIs database is “Linghang Education”, which is part-transliteration and part-translation of its Chinese name “领航教育”. The Respondent registered the domain name on March 10, 2015 and uses it in connection with a website in Chinese that offers online courses for Chinese and international students in Australia.

According to the Complaint, the disputed domain name was registered on August 8, 2016. At the time of the Complaint, it resolved to a website in Chinese that offered online education courses. The toolbar on the homepage, and the favicon, displayed a logo featuring the word “Unicareer”. The logo was not the same as any logo used by the Complainant. The website offered online CFA and PTE (i.e., Pearson Test of English) courses and university tutoring. A sidebar on the website regarding the PTE included a Quick Response Code (“QR code”) for what purported to be an official Unicareer public account. Internet users who scanned the QR code could contact a salesperson in Melbourne, whose Wechat ID contained the term “unicareer”. The Respondent also uploaded to the Internet a promotional video regarding “Unicareer PTE”. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

The disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s UNICAREER trademark and trade name. The Complainant has applied for several trademarks that include the element “unicareer”. The Complainant owns a trade name right in “Unicareer”. The Complainant has developed its business in many countries, including China and the United States of America (“United States”). The Complainant owns common law rights in UNICAREER due to its long term use of “Unicareer”. The Complainant has successfully completed several rounds of funding. Since its establishment, the Complainant has continued to use “Unicareer” as its trade name and core trademark and gained substantial reputation. The Complainant already reached agreements with many universities and corporations in China and the United States.

The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The Respondent has no trademark rights. The Complainant never directly or indirectly authorized the Respondent to use its trademark or trade name in any form.

The disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The Complainant’s UNICAREER trademark had already becom