Datingdirect com ltd
In this regard, Respondent states that Respondent’s website is not listed by Google, thus, it is not stealing any clients from Complainant.
In connection with this point, Respondent notes the existence of the website Dating.com, and under the same line of reasoning used for Respondent’s case, concludes that Complainant is stealing clientele from Dating.com, as the latter web page was registered a year before Complainant registered the Regarding this point, Respondent affirms that a possible reason for why abstains from accusing Complainant of infringement – as has been Respondent’s case before Complainant’s, for the same motives – is because recognizes that there is no infringement, due to the fact that operates in the United States and Complainant operates in the United Kingdom.
Report information is updated daily, however, if the latest credit limit is dated a while ago, this means that the credit limit has not changed since then. ‘In Judgement’ means the CCJ is still an active judgement and has not been paid.domain name on May 29, 2003, and Complainant became aware of its existence on early September 2004.