Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions

The Complainant is Dollar Financial Group, Inc., Berwyn, PA, USA ("Complainant") represented by Hilary B. Miller. The Respondent is Patrick Bishop, Helena, AL, USA ("Respondent").

The domain name at issue is "money-mart.com" registered with Network Solutions, Inc.

The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge, has no known conflict in serving as a panelist in this proceeding.

Judge Ralph Yachnin, as Panelist.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum") electronically on December 4, 2000; The Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on December 8, 2000.

On December 6, 2000, Network Solutions, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name "money-mart.com" is registered with Network Solutions, Inc. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Network Solutions, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions, Inc. 4.0 registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANNís Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

On December 8, 2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of December 28, 2000 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondentís registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to postmaster@money-mart.com by e-mail.

Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

On January 3, 2001, pursuant to Complainantís request to have the dispute decided by a One Member panel, the Forum appointed Judge Ralph Yachnin, as Panelist.

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent." Therefore, the Panel may issue its Decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the Forumís Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any Response from the Respondent.

The Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.

A. Complainant

Complainant contends Respondentís domain name, money-mart.com, is confusingly similar to its registered mark MONEY MART. The domain name is substantially identical in sound and appearance to Complainantís mark, except for the addition of a hyphen. Also, Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name at issue. And finally, Respondent has acted in bad faith because it has passively held the domain name in question since registration.

B. Respondent

Respondent has failed to submit a response in this matter.

Complainant, Dollar Financial Group, Inc., is a New York corporation that provides consumer financial services in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom under the logo MONEY MART. Since 1982, Complainant and its predecessors have spent millions of dollars advertising its consumer financial services, and have achieved approximately one billion dollars of sales using the MONEY MART name and logo. Complainant has owned the registered mark since May of 1999.

Respondent, Patrick Bishop, registered the domain name at issue approximately one month after Complainantís mark was published for opposition by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and approximately 14 years following Complainantís first use of the mark. Currently, Respondentís web site, money-mart.com, contains no content.

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."

In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of the Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules.

Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that the Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:

(1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Under the UDRP, Complainant must show that it has rights in a mark, and that the domain name at issue is identical or confusingly similar to that mark.

Accordingly, Complainantís rights are evidenced by its registered mark, MONEY MART. The Respondentís domain name, money-mart.com, is confusingly similar to Complainantís mark. Policy  4.a.(i). The only difference between the domain name at issue and Complainantís mark is the addition of a hyphen. See CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. LA-Twilight-Zone, D2000-0397 (WIPO June 19, 2000) (finding that putting a hyphen between words of the Complainantís mark is identical to and confusingly similar to Complainantí s mark); see also General Electric Co. v. Bakhit, D2000-0386 (WIPO June 22, 2000) (finding that placing a hyphen in a domain name between "General" and "Electric" is confusingly similar to Complainantís mark).

The Panel finds that Complainant met its burden of showing that the domain name at issue is confusingly similar to its mark.

Respondent asserted no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name in question. Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name, nor is Respondent using the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods, services, or for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Policy  4.c.(i) and (iii). See Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. Webdeal.com, Inc., FA 95162 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 29, 2000) (finding that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in domain names because it is not commonly known by Complainantís marks and Respondent has not used the domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use).

Thus, Respondentís failure to show evidence sufficient to rebut Complainantís contentions, entitles the Panel to conclude that Respondent has no such rights or legitimate interests in regard to the domain name at issue. See Pavillion Agency, Inc., Cliff Greenhouse and Keith Greenhouse v. Greenhouse Agency Ltd., and Glenn Greenhouse, D2000-1221 (WIPO Dec. 4, 2000) (finding that "Respondentsí failure to respond can be construed as an admission that they have no legitimate interest in the Domain Names").

Consequently, the Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name in question.

Finally, Respondent has demonstrated bad faith by passively holding the domain name at issue. See Clerical Medical Investment Group Ltd. v. Clericalmedical.com, D2000-1228 (WIPO Nov. 28, 2000) (finding that merely holding an infringing domain name without active use can constitute use in bad faith); see also The Caravan Club v. Mrgsale, FA 95314 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 30, 2000) (finding that the Respondent had made no use of the domain name or web site that connects with the domain name, and passive holding of a domain name permits an inference of registration and use in bad faith).

Therefore, the Panel finds the Respondent registered the domain name at issue in bad faith.

Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that the requested relief shall be and is hereby granted.Accordingly, it is Ordered that the domain name money-mart.com be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.