Steven L. Vensand v. HelpfulHal.com / Dns Admin
Claim Number: FA1205001445011
Complainant is Steven L. Vensand (“Complainant”), California, USA. Respondent is HelpfulHal.com (“Respondent”), represented by Brett Borzelli, California, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <newportbeachoptometry.com>, registered with Godaddy.com, 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.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on May 21, 2012; the National Arbitration Forum received payment on May 21, 2012.
On May 22, 2012, Godaddy.com, Llc, confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <newportbeachoptometry.com> domain name is registered with Godaddy.com, Llc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Godaddy.com, Llc has verified that Respondent is bound by the Godaddy.com registration agreement and have thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On May 30, 2012, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 19, 2012 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@newportbeachoptometry.com. Also on May 30, 2012, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On June 25, 2012, 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.
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" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. 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
Complainant, Steven L. Vensand, contends that he paid Respondent, HelpfulHal.com, to act as the intermediary between Complainant and the registrar, by registering the <newportbeachoptometry.com> domain name and developing the resolving website. Complainant now would like the domain name registered in his name in order to continue doing business on the website. Complainant alleges that Complainant himself presently uses the disputed domain name in good faith.
Complainant alleges that Respondent does not have rights in the <newportbeachoptometry.com> domain name. Complainant argues that Respondent does not have a connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services and did not make preparations to use the disputed domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the <newportbeachoptometry.com> domain name. Respondent does not make a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.
Respondent registered the <newportbeachoptometry.com> domain name on February 11, 2011.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Preliminary Issue: Business/Contractual Dispute Outside the Scope of the UDRP
Complainant argues that he retained Respondent’s services to create a website on behalf of Complainant’s optometry business. Complainant alleges in his communication with the National Arbitration Forum that Respondent registered the <newportbeachoptometry.com> domain name with the registrar using Respondent’s own name, instead of Complainant’s name. The WHOIS information for the disputed domain name identifies “HelpfulHal.com” as the registrant. Complainant asserts in his correspondence with the National Arbitration Forum that he wants to assume control of the disputed domain name that he paid Respondent to register but that the registrar will not transfer ownership of the domain name to Complainant without an order from the National Arbitration Forum.
The Panel finds that this is a business and/or contractual dispute between two companies that falls outside the scope of the UDRP. Complainant’s Complaint should be dismissed without prejudice. See Everingham Bros. Bait Co. v. Contigo Visual, FA 440219 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 27, 2005) (“The Panel finds that this matter is outside the scope of the Policy because it involves a business dispute between two parties. The UDRP was implemented to address abusive cybersquatting, not contractual or legitimate business disputes.”); see also Fuze Beverage, LLC v. CGEYE, Inc., FA 844252 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 8, 2007) (“The Complaint before us describes what appears to be a common-form claim of breach of contract or breach of fiduciary duty. It is not the kind of controversy, grounded exclusively in abusive cyber-squatting, that the Policy was designed to address.”); see also Frazier Winery LLC v. Hernandez, FA 841081 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 27, 2006) (holding that disputes arising out of a business relationship between the complainant and respondent regarding control over the domain name registration are outside the scope of the UDRP Policy).
Complainant’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.), Panelist
Dated: July 9, 2012
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page