Pedia Pals, LLC v. International Medical
Group BV
Claim
Number: FA0307000175286
Complainant is Pedia Pals, LLC, Plymouth, MN
(“Complainant”) represented by John W.
Provo, of Maslon Edelman Borman & Brand. Respondent is International Medical Group BV, Gassel, Netherlands
(“Respondent”).
REGISTRAR
AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME(s)
The
domain name at issue is <pediapals-online.com>, registered with Network
Solutions, Inc.
The
undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to
the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this
proceeding.
John
J. Upchurch as Panelist.
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum")
electronically on July 29, 2003; the Forum received a hard copy of the
Complaint on July 30, 2003.
On
August 4, 2003, Network Solutions, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that
the domain name <pediapals-online.com> is registered with Network
Solutions, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Network
Solutions, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions,
Inc. 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
August 5, 2003, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of
August 25, 2003 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@pediapals-online.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
September 11, 2003, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute
decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed John J. Upchurch 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 <pediapals-online.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s PEDIA PALS mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or
legitimate interests in the <pediapals-online.com> domain name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <pediapals-online.com>
domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in
this proceeding.
Complainant,
Pedia Pals, LLC, is a leading manufacturer of pediatric medical equipment and
supplies throughout the world.
Complainant also conducts business from its commercial website at the
<pediapals.com> domain name, which has been in existence since October
12, 2002. Complainant owns the mark
PEDIA PALS, which is a protected service mark registered in the United States
Patent and Trademark Office, Registration No. 1,946,401, registered on January
9, 1996.
The Respondent
is a former distributor of Complainant’s products whose appointment was
terminated by Complainant for cause as of May 20, 2003. Notwithstanding Complainant’s written demand
that Respondent cease and desist any further use of the contested domain name,
and the express prohibition against such use contained in the parties’
International Master Distributor Agreement (the “Distribution Agreement”),
Respondent continues to operate a website located at this domain address, which
website: (i) prominently features multiple uses of the Complainant’s registered
PEDIA PALS mark; (ii) offers Complainant’s products for sale; and (iii)
advertises itself as “…the Homepage of all PEDIAPALS-EUROPE.”
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
established that is has rights in the PEDIA PALS mark through registration with
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Furthermore, Respondent’s <pediapals-online.com> domain
name incorporates Complainant’s entire distinctive mark. The fact that a domain name incorporates a
Complainant’s registered mark is sufficient to establish confusing similarity
for purposes of the Policy, despite the addition of other words to such
marks. See Oki Data Americas, Inc.
v. ASD Inc., D2001-0903 (WIPO Nov. 6, 2001) (“the fact that a domain name
incorporates a Complainant’s registered mark is sufficient to establish
identical or confusing similarity for purposes of the Policy despite the
addition of other words to such marks”); see also Broadcom Corp. v. Domain Depot, FA 96854 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 23,
2001) (finding the <broadcomonline.com> domain name is confusingly
similar to Complainant’s BROADCOM mark).
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) has been satisfied.
Respondent has
failed to come forward with a Response.
Therefore, the Panel is permitted to make reasonable inferences in favor
of Complainant and accept Complainant’s allegations as true. See Desotec N.V. v. Jacobi Carbons AB, D2000-1398 (WIPO Dec. 21, 2000)
(finding that failing to respond allows a presumption that Complainant’s
allegations are true unless clearly contradicted by the evidence); see also
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”).
Furthermore,
based on Respondent’s failure to respond, it is presumed that Respondent lacks
all rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. See Do The Hustle, LLC v. Tropic
Web, D2000-0624 (WIPO Aug. 21, 2000) (finding that once Complainant
asserts that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the
domain, the burden shifts to Respondent to provide credible evidence that
substantiates its claim of rights and legitimate interests in the domain name);
see also Geocities v.
Geociites.com, D2000-0326 (WIPO June 19, 2000) (finding that Respondent has
no rights or legitimate interest in the domain name because Respondent never
submitted a Response nor provided the Panel with evidence to suggest otherwise).
Complainant
claims that Respondent uses the domain name to “secure commercial gain” and,
therefore, the domain name is not being used in connection with a bona fide
offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or in association
with a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶
4(c)(iii). As Respondent has used
Complainant’s mark without its authority to secure commercial gain, the Panel
finds that Respondent has used Complainant’s domain name in a manner contrary
to Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) and (iii). See
Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v.
Halpern, D2000-0700 (WIPO Dec. 10, 2000) (finding that domain names used to
sell Complainant’s goods without Complainant’s authority, as well as others’
goods is not bona fide use); see also Chanel, Inc. v. Cologne Zone, D2000-1809 (WIPO Feb. 22, 2001)
(finding that use of Complainant’s mark to sell Complainant’s perfume, as well
as other brands of perfume, is not bona fide use).
Respondent has
not come forward with any proof and there is no evidence on record to establish
that Respondent is commonly known by PEDIA PALS ONLINE or <pediapals-online>. Therefore, Respondent has failed to
establish that it has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain
name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See
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); see also RMO, Inc. v. Burbridge,
FA 96949 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 16, 2001) (interpreting Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii)
"to require a showing that one has been commonly known by the domain name
prior to registration of the domain name to prevail").
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) has been satisfied.
Complainant
urges that Respondent uses the disputed domain name as a means to divert
Complainant’s customers to Respondent’s website, which offers Complainant’s
goods for sale, and uses Complainant’s logo, along with other
product-identifying features.
Complainant contends that Respondent’s use creates consumer confusion as
to Complainant’s affiliation or sponsorship of the website. The Panel finds that Respondent registered
and used the domain names in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Busy Body, Inc. v. Fitness Outlet, Inc., D2000-0127 WIPO Apr. 22,
2000) (finding bad faith where Respondent attempted to attract customers to its
website, <efitnesswholesale.com>, and created confusion by offering
similar products for sale as Complainant); see also Fanuc Ltd v. Mach. Control Serv., FA 93667 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar.
13, 2000) (finding that Respondent violated Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) by selling used
Fanuc parts and robots on website <fanuc.com> because customers visiting
the site were confused as to the relationship between the Respondent and
Complainant).
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) has been satisfied.
Having
established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel
concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it
is Ordered that the <pediapals-online.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED
from Respondent to Complainant.
John
J. Upchurch, Panelist
Dated: September 26, 2003
Click Here to return
to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home
Page
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page