URS FINAL DETERMINATION
Deutsche Lufthansa AG v. WhoisGuard, Inc. / WhoisGuard Protected et al.
Claim Number: FA1901001825771
DOMAIN NAME
<staralliance.space>
PARTIES
Complainant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG of Frankfurt, Germany | |
Complainant Representative: Rauschhofer Rechtsanwälte
Dr. Hajo Rauschhofer of Wiesbaden, Germany
|
Respondent: Nikhil Jali of Livermore, CA, United States of America | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DotSpace Inc. | |
Registrars: Namecheap |
EXAMINER
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 Examiner in this proceeding. | |
Lars Karnøe, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: January 18, 2019 | |
Commencement: January 18, 2019 | |
Response Date: January 20, 2019 | |
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment] |
URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant The trademark STARALLIANCE ia as alleged by the Complainant a very well-known trademark which enjoys a wide protection against unauthorized use by a third party. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant The explanation put forward by the Respondent in the response which is a copy of that found on the website staralliance.space is not supported by any other evidence filed by the Respondent and must therefore be rejected.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties� submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant
has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing
evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Lars Karnøe
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page