Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions

The Complainant is Wellness International Network, Ltd. , Plano, TX, USA ("Complainant") represented by Dana M. Campbell, Owens, Clary & Aiken, L.L.P. The Respondent is Richard Sharif of Chicago, Illinois, USA ("Respondent").

The domain name at issue is "wellness-international.net", registered with Network Solutions, Inc.

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

John A. Bender is the sole 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 November 27, 2000.

On December 8, 2000, Network Solutions, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to The Forum that the domain name "wellness-international" 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. 5.0 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 13, 2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of January 2, 2001 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@wellness-international.net by e-mail.

On January 2, 2001 pursuant to Complainantís request to have the dispute decided by a One Member panel, the Forum appointed John A. Bender as Panelist.

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

A. Complainant

Complainant asserts that the Respondent has acquired the domain name in contravention of Complainants intellectual property. Complainant asserts the name is virtually identical to its registered mark; that Respondent has used the domain name illegitimately; and that Respondent is in bad faith in withholding the name.

B. Respondent

Respondent does not seriously disagree with Complainant, and he disavows the domain nameís use for any purpose. He blames the domain name registration and subsequent use on others, while acknowledging his credit card was used to cause the registration to be purchased. He does not oppose transferring the domain name to Complainant (See Paragraph 9 of Respondentís reply).

Others acting for Mr. Sharif registered the Domain Name in the face of, and with knowledge of Complainantís rights in the name. Complainant is entitled to the relief sought.

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (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."

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.

The domain name is nearly identical to Complainantís registered marks.

Respondent has no right or legitimate interests in the name and he disavows the name.

Domain name was Registered and used by agents of Respondent in bad faith.

Complainant is entitled to the relief sought. The Domain Name shall be transferred to Complainant.