Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and
Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company v. Gaines Enterprises
Claim Number: FA0505000474807
Complainant
is Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company (“Complainant”),
represented by Leon Medzhibovsky, of Fulbright & Jaworski LLP,
666 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10103.
Respondent is Gaines Enterprises (“Respondent”),
6691 South Marion Street, Littleton, CO 80121.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The
domain names at issue are <metlifeidentitytheft.com>
and <metlifeidtheft.com>, registered with Go Daddy Software, Inc.
PANEL
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.
The
Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on May
11, 2005; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint
on May 12, 2005.
On
May 11, 2005, Go Daddy Software, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National
Arbitration Forum that the domain names <metlifeidentitytheft.com>
and <metlifeidtheft.com> are registered with Go Daddy Software,
Inc. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Go Daddy Software, Inc. has verified that
Respondent is bound by the Go Daddy Software, 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
May 17, 2005, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of June 6,
2005 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@metlifeidentitytheft.com and
postmaster@metlifeidtheft.com by e-mail.
A
timely Response was received and determined to be complete on May 23, 2005.
On June 3, 2005, pursuant to Complainant’s request to
have the dispute decided by a single-member
Panel, the National Arbitration Forum
appointed the Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant
requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Metropolitan Property and
Casualty Insurance Company, contends that
1. Respondent’s <metlifeidentitytheft.com> and <metlifeidtheft.com>
domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered trademark, METLIFE.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or
legitimate interests in the <metlifeidentitytheft.com>
and <metlifeidtheft.com> domain names.
3.
Respondent registered and used the <metlifeidentitytheft.com>
and <metlifeidtheft.com> domain names in bad faith.
B.
Respondent, Gaines Enterprises,
has stipulated that the domain names may be transferred to Complainant.
FINDINGS
The origins of Complainant, Metropolitan
Life Insurance Company, date back to 1863.
For over three decades, Complainant has been known as MetLife and has
extensively used the MetLife name and mark in commerce, providing insurance and
related services for over 135 years.
Complainant is the record owner of United States Trademark Registration
No. 1,541,862 for the mark METLIFE, which was issued on May 30, 1989. Complainant also owns numerous other U.S.
Trademark Registrations for marks comprising METLIFE together with other terms.
DISCUSSION
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.
In Response to the Complaint, Respondent, Gaines
Enterprises, authorizes the transfer of the domain name to Complainant. Where such a stipulation is made, the Panel
may forgo the usual UDRP analysis and need only order the transfer of the
domain name. See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern
Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev.,
FA 133625 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name
registration where Respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev
Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat Arb. Forum
Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name
to be transferred to the Complainant . . . Since the requests of the
parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other
than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of
fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”).
DECISION
Having
established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel
concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <metlifeidentitytheft.com> and <metlifeidtheft.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from
Respondent to Complainant.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr.
(Ret.), Panelist
Dated: June 16, 2005
Click Here to return
to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click
Here to return to our Home Page
National
Arbitration Forum