Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions

P. O. Box 50191
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405 USA
www.arbitration-forum.com

SIGNAL SOLUTIONS CORPORATION

COMPLAINANT,

vs.

SIGNAL SOLUTIONS

RESPONDENT.

DECISION
Forum File No.: FA94630

________________________________________________________________

The above-entitled matter came on for an administrative hearing on

May 25, 2000 before the undersigned on the Complaint of DONALD RICHEY, SIGNAL SOLUTIONS CORPORATION, hereafter "Complainant", against SIGNAL SOLUTIONS, hereafter "Respondent". Complainant appeared pro se. Respondent did not appear.

Upon the written submitted record, the following decision is made:

PROCEDURAL FINDINGS

Domain Name: SIGNALSOLUTION.COM

Domain Name Registrar: Network Solutions, Inc.

Domain Name Registrant: SIGNAL SOLUTIONS

Date of Domain Name Registration: November 1, 1999.

Date Complaint filed: April 17, 2000.

Date of Commencement of Administrative Proceeding in Accordance with Rule

2(a) and Rule 4(c): April 20, 2000.

Due date for a Response: The twenty-day response period has expired in this case. Respondent did not appear as per the requirements of Rule 5(a).

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 20, 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 Network Solutions, Inc., the INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS (ICANN) and the Respondent that the administrative proceeding had commenced. Respondent did not appear as provided for in Rule 5(a).

On November 1, 1999, Respondent registered the domain name SIGNALSOLUTION.COM with Network Solutions, Inc. On April 24, 2000, Network Solutions, Inc. verified that Respondent is the Registrant for the domain name SIGNALSOLUTION.COM, and that further, by registering its domain name with Network Solutions, Inc., 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.

FINDINGS OF FACT

There being no response, the evidence is undisputed that:

1. Complainant is Signal Solutions Corporation, which registered the domain names signalsol.com and signalsol.net, signalsolutions.com and signalsolutions.net.

2. Respondent is Signal Solutions, which registered the domain name signalsolution.com on November 1, 1999.

3. The two domain names are confusingly similar and would be identical but for an "s" in Complainant's domain name that makes "solutions" plural and the absence of an "s" in Respondent's name that makes "solution" singular.

4. Complainant had an on-going business and learned of Respondent's domain name when Complainant's commerce was interrupted by consumers accessing Complainant's web site to complain about Respondent's "product or service."

5. These contacts were "very disruptive" of Complainant's business.

6. Respondent's web site's status is active.

7. Complainant's statement of its corporate status, taken as true in the absence of controversion, allows the inference that Complainant has a legitimate interest and right to the name SIGNALSOLUTIONS.COM and the confusingly similar name SIGNALSOLUTION.COM.

8. Complainant's statement of the disruption of its commerce, taken as true in the absence of controversion, allows the inference that Respondent registered the domain name SIGNALSOLUTION.COM in bad faith when it, contrary to ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, Paragraph 4(b)(iii), registered the domain name of another. The fact that this registration has resulted in adverse disruption of Complainant's business permits the inference that it was intended to disrupt the business of a competitor.

COMPLAINANT'S PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Complainant's prayer for relief requests that Respondent cease and desist using the domain name SIGNALSOLUTION.COM or any confusingly similar domain name. Proper relief is transfer as per Paragraph 4(i) of ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.

CONCLUSIONS

The undersigned certifies that she 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:

To prevail, the Complainant has the burden of establishing the three factors set out in ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy at Paragraph 4(a)(i),(ii) and (iii). Complainant has the burden of showing that (i) Respondent's domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (iii) Respondent registered the domain name and used it in bad faith. (Emphasis added.)

1. By uncontroverted evidence, Complainant met its burden of establishing that Respondent's domain name is identical to or confusingly similar to Complainant's domain name, pursuant to Paragraph 4(a)(i).

2. By inference, Complainant met its burden of establishing that Complainant has a legitimate interest in respect to the domain name SIGNALSOLUTIONS.COM, a domain name that uses Complainant's incorporated business name, and that Complainant should have a legitimate right to the confusingly similar name SIGNALSOLUTION.COM. Respondent offered no evidence that it had any legitimate interest in or right to use SIGNALSOLUTION.COM in its commercial enterprises and the name does not reflect an incorporated or registered status.

3. By inference, Complainant met its burden of establishing that Respondent acted in bad faith by registering a domain name confusingly similar or identical to Complainant's incorporated business name. The fact that this use has adversely disrupted Complainant's commerce, causing expense to Complainant, permits the inference that it was intended to disrupt the business of a competitor contrary to ICANN's Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy Paragraph 4(b)(iii).

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 SIGNALSOLUTION.COM REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT SIGNAL SOLUTIONS BE TRANSFERRED TO COMPLAINANT SIGNAL SOLUTIONS CORPORATION.

DATED: May 25, 2000 by Judge Carolyn Marks Johnson (Ret.), Arbitrator.