FloridaFirst Bank and FloridaFirst
Bancorp
COMPLAINANTS,
VS.
Mukadder Mufit Ozgunes
RESPONDENT.
DOMAIN NAME DISPUTE DECISION
Forum File No.: FA0004000094391
___________________________________________
The above entitled matter
came on for an administrative hearing on May 15, 2000 before the undersigned
on the
Complaint of the above named Complainants, against Mukadder Mufit
Ozgunes, hereafter "Respondent". Complainants are represented
by Kerry
P. Charlet. There was no representation on behalf of Respondent. Upon
the written submitted record,
the following DECISION is made:
PROCEDURAL FINDINGS
Domain Name: FloridaFirstBank.com
Domain Name Registrar: Register.com, Inc.
Domain Name Registrant: Mukadder Mufit Ozgunes
Date of Domain Name Registration: January 7, 1999
Date Complaint Filed: April 3, 2000
Due Date for a Response: April 27, 2000
Date of Commencement of Administrative Proceeding in Accordance with
Rule 2(a)l and Rule 4(c): April 7, 2000
After reviewing the Complaint,
and determining it to be in administrative compliance, the National
Arbitration
Forum (The Forum) forwarded the Complaint to the Respondent
on April 7, 2000 in compliance with Rule 2(a), and the administrative
proceeding was commenced pursuant to Rule 4(c). In compliance with Rule
4(d), The Forum immediately notified
the above Registrar, Register.com,
the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), and
the
Complainant that the administrative proceeding had commenced. Respondent
did not submit a response to The Forum. On January
7, 1999, Respondent
registered the domain name "FloridaFirst Bank.com" with Register.com,
the entity that is
the Registrar of the domain name. By registering
its domain name with Register.com, Respondent agreed to resolve any
dispute regarding its domain name through ICANN's Rules for Uniform
Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, and
the Uniform Domain Name Dispute
Resolution Policy.
The undersigned certifies
that he has acted independently and has no known conflict of interest
to serve as
the Arbitrator in this proceeding. Having been duly selected,
and being impartial, the undersigned makes the following
findings and
conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
- FloridaFirst Bank, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of FloridaFirst Bancorp, is a federal savings bank. The
subsidiary
and parent are incorporated under the laws of the United
States of America and registered to conduct business operations
in
the State of Florida.
- FloridaFirst Bank has
a federal bank charter, and FloridaFirst Bancorp. has a federal holding
company charter,
both obtained from agencies of the Federal government
for the purpose of providing banking and related services nationally.
The bank and holding company had to apply for their charters, which
were not granted until the Office of
Thrift Supervision determined
that the names were not confusingly similar to another banking institution.
- On October 27, 1998, the
bank applied to the Untied States Patent and Trademark Office to obtain
a trademark
for the name "FloridaFirst Bank" and the bank
expects the trademark to be granted this year.
- FloridaFirstBank.com is
identical and confusingly similar to a name which the Complainants
have established
rights to under State and Federal laws and banking
regulations, through numerous business transactions and public relations
activities, and through filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission
of the United States.
- The Respondent has no
rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, whereas the Complainant
FloridaFirst
Bank is commonly known by the same name as the domain
name and routinely conducts its business operations under that
name.
- No evidence has been presented
that Respondent has any right or legitimate interest to the domain
name as
provided in Rule 4(c).
- Complainants’ prayer
for relief requests that the domain name be transferred to FloridaFirst
Bancorp,
Inc.
CONCLUSIONS
To obtain relief under paragraph
4(a)of the Policy, the Complainant must prove each of the following:
- The domain name registered
by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark
or service
mark in which the Complainants have rights; and
- The Respondent has no
right or legitimate interest in the domain name; and
- The domain name has
been registered and used in bad faith.
Similarity Between Registrant’s
Domain Name and Complainants’ Trade or Service Mark. The domain
name registered by Respondent is confusingly similar to or identical to
the service mark owned by Complainants.
Respondent’s Rights or
Legitimate Interest in the Domain Name. Under paragraph 4(c) of the
Policy, evidence of a registrant’s rights or legitimate interest
in the domain
name includes:
- Demonstrable preparations
to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of
goods or
services prior to the dispute;
- An indication that the
registrant has been commonly known by the domain name even if it
has acquired
no trademark rights; or
- Legitimate noncommercial
or fair use of the domain name without intent to divert consumers
or to tarnish
the trademark.
Respondent has made no showing
with respect to any of the above factors. The Respondent has no rights
or legitimate
interest in the domain name. Respondent’s Bad Faith
Registration and Use of the Domain Name. Under paragraph 4(b) of the
Policy, evidence of Respondent’s bad faith registration and use includes:
- Circumstances indicating
the domain names were registered for the purpose of resale to the
trade or
service mark owner or competitor for profit;
- A pattern of conduct
showing an attempt to prevent others from obtaining a domain names
corresponding
to their trademarks;
- Registration of the
domain name for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor;
or
- Using the domain name
to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent’s
web site
or other on-line location by creating a likelihood of confusion
with the trademark owner’s mark.
The Respondent registered and
used the domain name in bad faith as evidenced by circumstances indicating
that Respondent
registered and acquired the domain name for the purpose
of resale to the mark owner or a competitor for valuable consideration
in excess of costs. Under ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Policy Complainants have proven that
the domain name should be transferred
to Complainants.
DECISION
Based upon the above findings
and conclusions, and pursuant to Rule 4(i), it is decided as follows:
THE UNDERSIGNED
DIRECTS THAT THE DOMAIN NAME "FloridaFirstBank.com"
REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT BE TRANSFERRED TO COMPLAINANT, FLORIDAFIRST
BANCORP.
Dated: May 15, 2000 Judge
Karl V. Fink, Arbitrator
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2000/319.html
