The Complainant is Dollar Rent A Car Systems, Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA ("Complainant"). The Respondent is Lee Jongho, Korea ("Respondent").

The domain name at issue is "DOLLARCAR.NET", registered with Network Solutions Inc ("NSI").

The Panelist 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 the panelist in this proceeding.

Judge Harold Kalina (Ret.) as Panelist.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum ("The Forum") electronically on 08/07/2000; The Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on 08/07/2000.

On 08/08/2000, NSI confirmed by e-mail to The Forum that the domain name "DOLLARCAR.NET" is registered with NSI and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NSI has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions Service Agreement Version 5.0 and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s UDRP.

On 08/09/2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of 08/29/2000 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, and to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts by e-mail. It was also e-mailed to postmaster@dollarcar.net.

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 August 31, 2000, 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 Uniform 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 the Respondent.

The Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.

A. Complainant

The Complainant’s contentions are:

(i). The domain name is identical and/or confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered trademarks;

(ii). Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name; and

(iii). Respondent has registered and used the domain name in bad faith.

B. Respondent

The Respondent has not submitted a response.

The Complainant rents cars in 289 locations in the United States and Canada and operates rental car locations in 50 of the largest U.S airports. The Complainant owns 19 U.S. trademark registrations for the term DOLLAR, five of which contain the word "CAR." As of the Complainant’s advertising and promotion of the marks DOLLAR and DOLLAR RENT A CAR, the Complainant’s services are widely associated with its car rental services.

The Complainant also owns trademark registrations for the mark DOLLAR in over ninety countries and for the mark DOLLAR RENT A CAR in approximately fifty countries.

The Complainant owns the domain names <dollarcar.com> and <dollar.com>. The Complainant uses its websites to advertise its services and conduct business.

The Respondent registered the domain name in question on June 29, 2000. The Respondent’s website is "parked", meaning that the Respondent has not used, or demonstrated any preparations to use the domain name.

On July 17, 2000, the Complainant emailed the Respondent offering to purchase the domain name for $1,000. The Respondent responded stating that he would sell the domain name for $3,000. The Respondent also indicated that this offer would only be good for the duration of the month and then he would sell the domain name on an auction site. The Respondent’s email address is saleforyou@hanmail.net.

ICANN Uniform Rule 14(b) provides that, absent exceptional circumstances, the Panel shall draw inferences, as it deems appropriate, from the failure of a party to comply with a provision or requirement of the Uniform Rules. Because the Respondent failed to submit a response, the Panel will accept all rational inferences presented in the Complaint.

Paragraph 4(a) of the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy ("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.

The Complainant has rights in the registered trademarks DOLLAR and DOLLAR RENT A CAR. The Respondent’s domain name is identical to or confusingly similar the Complainant’s marks and domain names. Internet browsers seeking the Complainant’s website and services could be erroneously confused that the Respondent’s inactive website is somehow connected with the Complainant’s services. See Nintendo of America, Inc. v. Lizmi, FA 94329 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 20, 2000) (finding that Respondent’s domain names <pokemon2000.com> and <pokemons.com> are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark).

The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name in question. The Respondent has not denied this assertion.

The Respondent has not submitted any evidence indicating that it has a business or organization entitled DOLLARCAR or DOLLARCAR.NET. The Respondent has not sought U.S. trademark registration of the mark nor is licensed from the Complainant to use the mark. See Fanuc Ltd v. Machine Control Services, FA 93667 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 13, 2000) (finding that Respondent had no rights or legitimate interest because Respondent does not own the registered mark, has no permission from the Complainant to use the mark, nor is affiliated with the Fanuc business in any way). Therefore, the Panel concludes that the Respondent is not commonly known by the mark comprising the domain name. Policy ¶ 4.c.(ii). The Respondent has made no use of the domain name; therefore, the Panel concludes that the Respondent has not used the domain name for a legitimate noncommercial purpose or in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services. Policy ¶ 4.c.(i), (iii). The Panel determines that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.

The Complainant contends that the Respondent registered and used the domain name in

bad faith. The Respondent has not denied this assertion.

The Respondent’s offer to sell the domain name for $3,000 reveals that he registered the domain name in order to sell it for a profit. The Respondent’s email address, saleforyou@hanmail.net evidences the Complainant’s intent to registered and sell domain names. The Respondent registered the domain name for the purpose of transferring or selling the domain name for valuable consideration in excess of out of pocket costs connected with the domain name. Policy ¶ 4.b.(iv). This is evidence of bad faith registration and use of a domain name. See Nabisco Brands Co. v. The Patron Group, D2000-0032 (WIPO Feb. 23, 2000) (finding that the Respondent registered and used the domain names to profit where Respondent offered to sell the domain names for $2,300 per name).

Having established all three elements required by the ICANN Policy Rule 4(a), it is the decision of the panel that the requested relief be granted.

Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the domain name, "DOLLARCAR.NET", be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.