URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
Deutsche Lufthansa AG v. Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Claim Number: FA1605001674879
DOMAIN NAME
<milesandmore.club>
PARTIES
Complainant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG of Frankfurt, Germany | |
Complainant Representative: Rauschhofer Rechtsanwälte
Hajo Rauschhofer of Wiesbaden, Germany
|
Respondent: Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc. Whois Agent of Yarmouth, NS, CA | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: .CLUB DOMAINS, LLC | |
Registrars: eNom, Inc. |
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. | |
Tuukka Ilkka Airaksinen, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: May 13, 2016 | |
Commencement: May 16, 2016 | |
Default Date: June 1, 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 Complainant is the proprietor of the European Union Trademark registration No 002551638 for Miles & More. The only difference between the disputed domain name and the Complainant's trademark is the replacing of the symbol & with the word "and". These mean the same and are synonymous and therefore insufficient to exclude likelihood of confusion between the Complainant's trademark and the disputed domain name. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant 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:
|
Tuukka Ilkka Airaksinen Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page