Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
Arminius Select Services Corporation v.
Henry Chan
Claim
Number: FA0404000250830
Complainant is Arminius Select Services Corporation (“Complainant”),
represented by Michelle Evans, of Gunn & Lee P.C.,
700 N. St. Mary's Suite 1500, San Antonio, TX 78205. Respondent is Henry Chan
(“Respondent”), P.O. Box SS-6348-A124, Nassau, Bahamas.
REGISTRAR
AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The
domain name at issue is <columbia300bowling.com>, registered with iHoldings.com,
Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com.
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
Panelist in this proceeding.
Judge
Harold Kalina (Ret.) as Panelist.
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum")
electronically on April 8, 2004; the Forum
received a hard copy of the
Complaint on April 12, 2004.
On
April 12, 2004, iHoldings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com confirmed by e-mail
to the Forum that the domain name <columbia300bowling.com> is
registered with iHoldings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com and that Respondent
is the current registrant of the name. iHoldings.com,
Inc. d/b/a
Dotregistrar.com has verified that Respondent is bound by the iHoldings.com,
Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com registration
agreement and has thereby agreed to
resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with
ICANN's Uniform Domain
Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").
On
April 13, 2004, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"),
setting a deadline of
May 3, 2004 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 Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing
contacts,
and to postmaster@columbia300bowling.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
May 20, 2004, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by
a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Judge
Harold Kalina (Ret.) 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 Forum's Supplemental
Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable,
without the benefit of any Response
from Respondent.
Complainant
requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
1. Respondent’s <columbia300bowling.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s COLUMBIA 300 mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or
legitimate interests in the <columbia300bowling.com> domain name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <columbia300bowling.com>
domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in
this proceeding.
Complainant,
Arminius Select Services Corporation, through its licensees, has manufactured
bowling balls and bowling equipment since
1964 in the United States and around
the world. It registered the COLUMBIA
300 mark (Reg. No. 798,769) with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”)
on November 16, 1965.
Respondent,
Henry Chan, registered the <columbia300bowling.com> domain name on
March 15, 2004. Respondent is
appropriating Complainant’s mark in connection with information about
Complainant and bowling in general.
Respondent also uses Complainant’s mark it the text of its website at <columbia300bowling.com>.
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 Complainant's
undisputed
representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and
draw such inferences it considers appropriate
pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of
the Rules.
Paragraph 4(a)
of the Policy requires that 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 Respondent
is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which
Complainant has
rights; and
(2) 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.
Complainant has
rights in the COLUMBIA 300 mark as evidenced by it registration with the
USPTO. See Men’s Wearhouse, Inc. v.
Wick, FA 117861 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 16, 2002) (“Under U.S. trademark
law, registered marks hold a presumption that they are inherently
distinctive
and have acquired secondary meaning.”); see also Janus Int’l Holding Co. v. Rademacher, D2002-0201 (WIPO Mar. 5,
2002) (finding that Panel decisions have held that registration of a mark is prima facie evidence of validity, which
creates a rebuttable presumption that the mark is inherently distinctive. Respondent has the burden of refuting this
assumption).
The Panel finds
that the <columbia300bowling.com> domain name is confusingly
similar to the COLUMBIA 300 mark, the only difference is the elimination of the
space between the words
and the addition of the word “bowling,” which describes
Complainant’s business. Eliminating the
spaces between the words and adding the word “bowling” does not significantly
distinguish the <columbia300bowling.com> from Complainant’s
COLUMBIA 300 mark. See Planned Parenthood Fed’n of Am. v. Bucci,
42 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1430 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) aff’d 152 F3d 920 (2d Cir. 1998) cert.
denied 525 U.S. 834 (1998) (finding plaintiff’s PLANNED PARENTHOOD mark and
defendant’s <plannedparenthood.com> domain name nearly identical); see
also Space Imaging LLC v. Brownwell, AF-0298 (eResolution Sept. 22, 2000) (finding confusing similarity
where Respondent’s domain name combines Complainant’s mark with
a generic term
that has an obvious relationship to Complainant’s business).
The Panel finds
that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Respondent has
not filed a Response. The Panel may
find that all reasonable allegations by Complainant are true. See Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson, D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In
the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations
of the Complaint.”);
see also Strum v. Nordic Net Exchange AB, FA 102843
(Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 21, 2002) (finding that in accordance with Paragraph
14(b) of the Policy, the Panel may draw such
inferences as it considers
appropriate, if Respondent fails to comply with the Panel's requests for
information).
Respondent is
wholly appropriating Complainant’s mark to conduct its business and give
information about Complainant’s goods and bowling
in general. The Panel finds that this is not a bona fide
offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate
noncommercial
or fair use of the domain name pursuant to Policy ¶
4(c)(iii). See Computerized Sec.
Sys., Inc. v. Hu, FA 157321 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 23, 2003) (holding that
Respondent’s appropriation of Complainant’s mark to market products that
compete with Complainant’s goods does not constitute a bona fide offering of
goods and services); see also Clear Channel Communications, Inc. v. Beaty
Enters., FA 135008 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 2, 2003) (finding that Respondent,
as a competitor of Complainant, had no rights or legitimate interests
in a
domain name that utilized Complainant’s mark for its competing website).
There is nothing
in the record, including Respondent’s WHOIS domain name registration
information, which indicates that Respondent
is commonly known by the domain
name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See
Tercent Inc. v. Yi, FA 139720 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 10, 2003)
(stating “nothing in Respondent’s WHOIS information implies that Respondent is
‘commonly
known by’ the disputed domain name” as one factor in determining that
Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) does not apply); see also Gallup Inc. v. Amish
Country Store, FA 96209
(Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 23, 2001) (finding that Respondent does not have rights
in a domain name when Respondent is not known
by the mark).
The Panel finds
that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
Respondent is
using Complainant’s mark to sell and give information about Complainant’s goods
and bowling. The Panel finds that
Respondent is attempting to disrupt a competitor’s business, which is evidence
of bad faith registration and
use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii). See Surface Protection Indus., Inc. v. Webposters, D2000-1613 (WIPO
Feb. 5, 2001) (finding that, given the competitive relationship between
Complainant and Respondent, Respondent
likely registered the contested domain
name with the intent to disrupt Complainant's business and create user
confusion); see also Fossil, Inc.
v. NAS, FA 92525 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 23, 2000) (transferring the
<fossilwatch.com> domain name from Respondent, a watch dealer not
otherwise authorized to sell Complainant’s goods, to Complainant).
In addition, by
not only appropriating Complainant’s mark in the domain name, but also
appropriating it in the text of the website
(at which the domain name
resolves), the Panel finds that Respondent is trying to create a likelihood of
confusion with the source
of its goods.
The Panel finds that this is evidence of bad faith registration and use
because Respondent is creating a likelihood of confusion for
commercial gain,
pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Identigene, Inc. v. Genetest Lab.,
D2000-1100 (WIPO Nov. 30, 2000) (finding bad faith where Respondent's use of
the domain name at issue to resolve to a website where
similar services are
offered to Internet users is likely to confuse the user into believing that
Complainant is the source of or
is sponsoring the services offered at the
site); see also Reuters Ltd. v.
Global Net 2000, Inc., D2000-0441 (WIPO July 13, 2000) (finding bad faith
where Respondent attracted users to a website sponsored by Respondent and
created
confusion with Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, or
affiliation of that website).
The Panel finds
that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Having
established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel
concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it
is Ordered that the <columbia300bowling.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED
from Respondent to Complainant.
__________________________________________________________________
Judge
Harold Kalina (Ret.), Panelist
Dated: June 1, 2004
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2004/845.html