Morgan Stanley v. Zhang Sheng Yu
Claim Number: FA1506001626131
Complainant is Morgan Stanley (“Complainant”), represented by Eric J. Shimanoff of Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C., New York, USA. Respondent is Zhang Sheng Yu (“Respondent”), Peoples’ Republic of China.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <xn--riqv9gi8ghlnpte.com>, registered with HiChina Zhicheng Technology Limited.
The undersigned 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 Panelist in this proceeding.
Sebastian M W Hughes as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on June 25, 2015; the Forum received payment on June 25, 2015. The Complaint was submitted in both Chinese and English.
On June 29, 2015, HiChina Zhicheng Technology Limited confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <xn--riqv9gi8ghlnpte.com> domain name is registered with HiChina Zhicheng Technology Limited and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. HiChina Zhicheng Technology Limited has verified that Respondent is bound by the HiChina Zhicheng Technology Limited registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On June 30, 2015, the Forum served the Chinese language Complaint and all Annexes, including a Chinese language Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of July 20, 2015 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@xn--riqv9gi8ghlnpte.com. Also on June 30, 2015, the Chinese language 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 Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On July 24, 2015, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Sebastian M W Hughes 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" 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 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 is a well-known global investment bank and the owner of the well-known trademark MORGAN STANLEY, as well as the Chinese language trade mark摩根士丹利 (the “Trademark”), which is the phonetic transliteration of Complainant’s MORGAN STANLEY trademark, registered and used in China since 2003.
The domain name <摩根士丹利.com> (punycode <xn--riqv9gi8ghlnpte.com> comprises the Trademark in its entirety.
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, which has been passively held.
Given the notoriety of the Trademark, Respondent must have known of Complainant and of its rights in the Trademark when Respondent registered the domain name. Respondent’s passive use of the domain name amounts to bad faith registration and use.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to transfer of the domain name.
Pursuant to Rule 11(a), the Panel determines that the language requirement has been satisfied through the Chinese language Complaint and Commencement Notification, and, absent a Response, determines that the remainder of the proceedings may be conducted in English.
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."
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.
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.”).
The domain name is identical to the Trademark.
Respondent has failed to demonstrate any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. The uncontested evidence shows that the domain name has never been used.
In all the circumstances, and given in particular the notoriety of the Trademark, the Panel has no hesitation in concluding that Respondent’s registration and passive use of the domain name constitutes bad faith registration and use.
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <xn--riqv9gi8ghlnpte.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Sebastian M W Hughes, Panelist
Dated: August 7, 2015
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page