Claim Number: FA0611000857631
Complainant is United States Golf Association (“Complainant”), represented by Philip
R. Hoffman, of Pryor Cashman Sherman & Flynn LLP,
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN
NAME
The domain name at issue is <2005uswomensopen.com>, registered with Bulkregister, Llc.
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. Louis E. Condon, as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to
the National Arbitration Forum electronically on
On December 12, 2006, Bulkregister, Llc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <2005uswomensopen.com> domain name is registered with Bulkregister, Llc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Bulkregister, Llc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Bulkregister, Llc. 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 December 21, 2006, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of January 10, 2007 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@2005uswomensopen.com by e-mail.
Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the National Arbitration 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 National Arbitration 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 <2005uswomensopen.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s U.S. WOMEN’S OPEN mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <2005uswomensopen.com> domain name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <2005uswomensopen.com> domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Respondent registered the <2005uswomensopen.com>
domain name on
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. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc. v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); 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.”).
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 asserts rights in the U.S. WOMEN’S OPEN
mark through registration with the USPTO.
The Panel finds that Complainant’s registration and use of the U.S.
WOMEN’S OPEN mark is sufficient to establish rights pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Innomed Techs., Inc. v. DRP Servs.,
FA 221171 (Nat. Arb. Forum
Respondent’s <2005uswomensopen.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark. Respondent’s disputed domain name features
Complainant’s entire U.S. WOMEN’S OPEN mark and adds the number “2005,” an
obvious allusion to the year of Complainant’s event. The Panel finds that the addition of the year
“2005” to an otherwise identical mark fails to sufficiently distinguish a
domain name from a mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Omnitel Pronto Italia S.p.A. v. Bella,
D2000-1641 (WIPO
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i)
has been satisfied.
Complainant claims Respondent lacks rights or legitimate
interests in the <2005uswomensopen.com>
domain name. In instances where
Complainant has made a prima facie case under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), the burden shifts to Respondent to set forth concrete
evidence that it does possess rights or legitimate interests in the disputed
domain name. See G.D. Searle v.
Martin Mktg., FA 118277 (Nat. Arb. Forum
Respondent is using the disputed domain name to resolve to a
website that features adult-oriented material unrelated to Complainant’s
business. The Panel finds that
Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name is neither a bona fide offering
of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) nor
a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Dipaolo v.
Genero, FA 203168 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 6,
2003) (“Diversion to pornography is not a bona fide offering of goods or
services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name pursuant
to Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) and (iii).”); see also Target Brands,
Inc. v. Bealo Group S.A., FA 128684 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 17, 2002)
(finding that use of the <targetstore.net> domain name to redirect Internet users to a pornographic website
did not equate to a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy
¶ 4(c)(i), or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of a domain name under
Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii)).
Furthermore, Complainant alleges that Respondent is neither
commonly known by the <2005uswomensopen.com>
domain name nor authorized to register domain names featuring Complainant’s
U.S. WOMEN’S OPEN mark in any way. In the
absence of evidence to suggest otherwise, the Panel finds that Respondent has
not established rights or legitimate interests in accordance with Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See Tercent Inc. v. Lee Yi, FA 139720 (Nat. Arb.
Forum
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii)
has been satisfied.
Respondent’s disputed domain name resolves to a website featuring adult-oriented material. The Panel finds that Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name evinces bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Six Continents Hotels, Inc. v. Nowak, D2003-0022 (WIPO Mar. 4, 2003) ( “[W]hatever the motivation of Respondent, the diversion of the domain name to a pornographic site is itself certainly consistent with the finding that the Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith.”); see also Ty, Inc. v. O.Z. Names, D2000-0370 (WIPO June 27, 2000) (finding that absent contrary evidence, linking the domain names in question to graphic, adult-oriented websites is evidence of bad faith).
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii)
has been satisfied.
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief should be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <2005uswomensopen.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Louis E. Condon, Panelist
Dated: January 30, 2007
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National
Arbitration Forum