Complainant is Bloomberg L.P., New York, NY, USA ("Complainant") represented by Alexander Kim. Respondent is RusskayaReklama.com, Inc., New York, NY, USA ("Respondent").

The domain names at issue are <elbloomberg.com> and <bloombergmichael.com> registered with Gandi Auto Register.

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.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum") electronically on June 28, 2001; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on June 28, 2001.

On June 28, 2001, Gandi Auto Register confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain names <elbloomberg.com> and <bloombergmichael.com> are registered with Gandi Auto Register and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Gandi Auto Register has verified that Respondent is bound by the Gandi Auto Register 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 June 29, 2001, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of July 19, 2001 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@elbloomberg.com and postmaster@bloombergmichael.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 July 26, 2001, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed the Hon. James A. Carmody 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 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 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 names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

A. Complainant

On its face, the domain names registered by Respondent are confusingly similar to Complainant's mark, BLOOMBERG. The domain names <elbloomberg.com> and <bloombergmichael.com> incorporate variations of the mark BLOOMBERG in a thinly veiled attempt to garner the goodwill and recognition of the famous mark, BLOOMBERG.

The disputed domain names are virtually identical to Complainant's well-established mark. The only difference between Complainant's mark and the <elbloomberg.com>

domain name at issue is the addition of the letters "el".

Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in <elbloomberg.com> or <bloombergmichael.com>. Complainant has not licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to use the Complainant's mark or any of the BLOOMBERG family of marks, nor has Complainant licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to apply for or use any domain name incorporating those marks.

To Complainant's knowledge, Respondent has never been commonly known by BLOOMBERG, ELBLOOMBERG, or BLOOMBERGMICHAEL and has never acquired a trademark or service mark in such name. There is no evidence to suggest that Respondent had ever offered any product or service in relation to the disputed domain names.

B. Respondent did not submit a Response to this matter.

Complainant registered the trademark and service mark BLOOMBERG, March 18, 1997 on the Principal Register of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (hereinafter the "USPTO") as Registration No. 2,045,947.

Complainant has also registered on the Principal Register of the USPTO, and continually used in commerce, a family of at least twenty-three trademarks and service marks containing the word BLOOMBERG. In addition, Complainant has obtained registrations for marks containing the word BLOOMBERG in over seventy-five countries around the world.

Michael R. Bloomberg founded Complainant in 1983. For almost twenty years, Michael R. Bloomberg has been one of the most recognizable names in worldwide financial and news services.

Respondent registered <elbloomberg.com> and <bloombergmichael.com> on May 13, 2001 and May 31, 2001, respectively.

After Complainant informed Respondent on May 30, 2001 that his registration of the domain name <elbloomberg.com> constituted unauthorized use of BLOOMBERG intellectual property, Respondent registered the domain name <bloombergmichael.com> the very next day.

Respondent has not developed a website for either domain name and there is no evidence that Respondent plans to do so.

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 the Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules.

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.

The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered BLOOMBERG mark. The <elbloomberg.com> domain name fully incorporates Complainant’s mark, and the additional letters does not avoid the finding of confusing similarity under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See NIIT Ltd. v. Venkatram, D2000-0497 (WIPO Aug. 4, 2000) (finding that the "domain name <myniit.com>, which incorporates the word NIIT as a prominent part thereof, is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade name and trademark NIIT").

Additionally, the <bloombergmichael.com> domain is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because it adds the founder’s first name to the BLOOMBERG mark, and it is identical to the name of Complainant’s founder Michael Bloomberg. See Space Imaging LLC v. Brownwell, AF-0298 (eResolution Sept. 22, 2000) (finding confusing similarity where the Respondent’s domain name combines the Complainant’s mark with a generic term that has an obvious relationship to the Complainant’s business); see also Estate of Tupac Shakur v. Shakur Info Page, AF-0346 (eResolution Sept. 28, 2000) (finding that a "person may acquire such a reputation in his or her own name as to give rise to trademark rights in that name at common law").

The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied the burden under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

1983. Because BLOOMBERG has no meaning other than to identify Michael R. Bloomberg and his company, it is unlikely Respondent independently arrived at the domain names. Complainant has not licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to use the Complainant's mark or any of the BLOOMBERG family of marks, nor has Complainant licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to apply for or use any domain name incorporating those marks. Respondent has never been commonly known by BLOOMBERG and has never acquired a trademark or a service mark in such name to satisfy Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).

In addition, the Respondent failed to provide any evidence showing legitimate commercial or non-commercial interests in the domain name under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). Respondent has been passively holding the domain names and has not made a bona fide offering of goods in connection with the domain names. See Chanel, Inc. v. Heyward, D2000-1802 (Feb. 23, 2001) (finding no rights or legitimate interests where "Respondent registered the domain name and did nothing with it"). Therefore, the Panel determines that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.

The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied the burden under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).

Based on the strength and renown of the BLOOMBERG mark, registration and use of domain names identical or confusingly similar to such mark, without a good faith explanation, raises an inference of bad faith. See America Online Inc. v. Shenzhen JZT Computer Software Co. Ltd, D2000-0809 (WIPO Sept. 6, 2000) (finding that "gameicq.com" and "gameicq.net" are obviously connected with services provided with the world-wide business of ICQ and the very use by someone with no connection with the product suggests opportunistic bad faith).

Respondent’s passive holding of the domain names is sufficient to find bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Alitalia –Linee Aeree Italiane S.p.A v. Colour Digital, D2000-1260 (WIPO Nov. 23, 2000) (finding bad faith where the Respondent made no use of the domain name in question and there are no other indications that the Respondent could have registered and used the domain name in question for any non-infringing purpose); see also DCI S.A. v. Link Commercial Corp., D2000-1232 (WIPO Dec. 7, 2000) (concluding that the Respondent’s passive holding of the domain name satisfies the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).

The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied the burden under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).

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 names <elbloomberg.com> and <bloombergmichael.com> be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.