This case is a joke, the Canadian TM was just applied for this year. In fact, two separate and distinctly different TM's on "nuro" were applied for this year in Canada. The .com was registered in 1985. lol.
It's not usually the registration date that counts in a UDRP, but rather when the respondent acquired the domain. But I'm pretty sure that was over a year ago as well. [ed: It was as Fracnois responded in the comments].
You know all this, but it's only because rogue panelists created idiotic precedent that went against property law, and in the case of expensive domains, even if the UDRP falsely assigns the domain to the complaint, it's one quick court filing under the official cybersquatting law (which is entirely based on registration date) and you get the domain back, usually without even going to court.
Some rich Chinese domainers actually abuse the utter stupidity of the UDRP and allow domains to be stolen, then immediately file in court, usually reaching a financial settlement not to sue.