The Complainant is L.L. Bean, Inc., Freeport, ME, USA ("Complainant"). The Respondent is ShopStarNetwork, Baltimore, MD, USA ("Respondent").

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

The Panelist James P. Buchele 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.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum ("The Forum") electronically on 08/11/2000; The Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on 08/11/2000.

On 08/14/2000, NSI confirmed by e-mail to The Forum that the domain name "SHOPLLBEAN.COM" 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 08/15/2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of 09/05/2000 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@shopllbean.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 8, 2000 pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a Single Member panel, The Forum appointed James P. Buchele 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 contends that the Respondent has registered and used the domain name, which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s marks, in bad faith. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent lacks rights or a legitimate interest in the domain name.

B. Respondent

The Respondent has not contested the allegations of the Complainant. Based on this, the Panel will accept all reasonable allegations asserted in the Complaint as true. ICANN Uniform Rule 14(b).

The Complainant is a Maine corporation, established in 1912. The Complainant is a highly recognized supplier of premium quality clothing and outdoor products through its mail-order business. The Complainant holds 59 federal trademark registrations, including 8 registrations that directly incorporate the words "L.L. Bean".

On June 8, 2000, the Respondent ‘s administrative contact sent the Complainant an email offering the domain name for sale. According to this email, the Complainant’s failure to purchase the domain name would result in the sale of the domain name to the general public.

The Respondent is in the business of registering domain names which contain variations of the famous marks and offering them for sale to the public.

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 mark L.L. Bean through its multiple U.S. trademark registrations. The Respondent’s domain name combines the Complainant’s mark with the word "shop". Combining a generic word with the Complainant’s registered mark does not circumvent the Complainant’s rights in the mark nor avoid the confusing similarity aspect of the ICANN Policy. The Panel determines that since the word "shop" has to do with the Complainant’s business, when it is combined with the Complainant’s mark, consumers are confused and misled. See Caterpillar Inc. v. Metal Moves, FA 95034 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 27, 2000) (finding that the domain name <catequipment.com> is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark).

The Complainant asserts that the Respondent lacks a legitimate interest in the domain name. The Respondent has failed to submit a response denying that assertion.

The Respondent has never had an association with the Complainant nor has been commonly known by the Complainant’s official marks. Policy ¶ 4.c.(ii). The Respondent appears to be in the business of registering domain names that contain variations of famous marks. This is not a legitimate noncommercial use of the domain name nor a bona fide offering of goods or services in connection with the domain name. Policy ¶ 4.c.(i), (iii). See America Online, Inc. v. Tencent Communications Corp., FA 93668 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 21, 2000) (finding that use of a site "as a portal to suck surfers into a site sponsored by Tencent seems hardly legitimate"). The Panel concludes that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the domain name.

The Complainant contends that the Respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith. The Respondent has failed to submit a response denying that assertion.

The Respondent has registered the domain name in order to prevent the Complainant from reflecting its mark in the corresponding domain name. The Respondent has engaged in a pattern of conduct based on the multiple number of domain names registered. This conducts violates ICANN Policy ¶ 4.b.(ii). See The Pep Boys Manny, Moe, and Jack v. E-Commerce Today, Ltd., AF-0145 (eResolution May 3, 2000) (finding that where the Respondent registered many domain names, held them hostage, and prevented the owners from using them constituted bad faith). Offering the domain names for sale is also evidence of bad faith. Policy ¶ 4.b.(i). See General Electric Co. v. Forddirect.com, Inc., D2000-0394 (WIPO June 22, 2000) (finding that the Respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith by using the domain name to direct users to a general site offering the domain name for sale). Based on the above, the Panel concludes that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.

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, "SHOPLLBEAN.COM", be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.