URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
Genzyme Corporation v. Wang Hui Min
Claim Number: FA1604001672183
DOMAIN NAME
<genzyme.tech>
PARTIES
Complainant: Genzyme Corporation of Cambridge, MA, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: Marchais Associes
Philippe MARTINI-BERTHON of Paris, France
|
Respondent: Wang Hui Min Wang Hui Min of Tai Yuan, SX, II, CN | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Dot Tech LLC | |
Registrars: CHENGDU WEST DIMENSION DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. |
EXAMINER
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 Examiner in this proceeding. | |
David L. Kreider Esq,, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: April 27, 2016 | |
Commencement: April 27, 2016 | |
Default Date: May 12, 2016 | |
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment] |
Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant The disputed domain name is identical to the above cited trademark consisting in whole of the word “GENZYME”. The Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant in any way. It has never been authorized by the Complainant to register or use any domain name incorporating “GENZYME” trademark. Respondent has through the registration of confusingly similar disputed domain name created a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s trademark. Moreover, the likelihood of confusion is ascertained by the reputation of Complainant’s trade name, trademarks, domain names (e.g. <genzyme.com>) and goodwill, regardless of the descriptive extension <tech>. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent registered the disputed domain name on April 7, 2016 despite receiving notification that the domain name match a mark registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse. The Respondent is required to have clicked on the Registrar notice Acknowledge Claim when presented with the Trademark Claims Notice to complete registration of the name. Respondent, at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name, therefore knew the existence of Complainant’s trademark. Insofar as the contested domain name resolves to an inactive page, Respondent has evidenced no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name as he is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, nor is he using the litigious domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant Complainant is a major player on the worldwide pharmaceutical market and is composed of two business units – Rare Diseases and Multiple Sclerosis – that develop treatments for serious and debilitating diseases in the fields of genetic, endocrine and cardiovascular diseases. Complainant is the owner of numerous trademark registrations worldwide that consist of or contain the mark GENZYME, including the American trademark registration No.1859429 and enjoys a widespread reputation in the world (see http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=D2011-0574). Respondent registered the disputed domain name on April 7, 2016 despite receiving notification that the domain name match a mark registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse. The Respondent is required to have clicked on the Registrar notice Acknowledge Claim when presented with the Trademark Claims Notice to complete registration of the name. Respondent, at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name, therefore knew the existence of Complainant’s trademark. FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties’ submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant
has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing
evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
David L. Kreider Esq, Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page