DECISION

 

YETI Coolers, LLC v. Jerry Stonecipher

Claim Number: FA1606001679039

 

PARTIES

Complainant is YETI Coolers, LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Katherine Laatsch Fink of Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., Illinois, USA.  Respondent is Jerry Stonecipher (“Respondent”), Ohio, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES

The domain names at issue are <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.

 

PANEL

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.

 

Bruce E. Meyerson as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on June 10, 2016; the Forum received payment on June 10, 2016.

 

On June 13, 2016, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names.  GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC 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 13, 2016, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of July 5, 2016 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@wrapmyyeti.com and postmaster@wrapyouryeti.com.  Also on June 13, 2016, 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 Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On July 7, 2016, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Bruce E. Meyerson 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.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

1.    Complainant sells portable coolers, insulated beverage containers, and other products under the YETI mark. Complainant holds numerous registrations for the mark in the United States (e.g., USPTO Reg. No. 3,203,869, registered Jan. 30, 2007) and other jurisdictions; Complainant also claims common law rights in the mark.

2.    Complainant offers customized products and customization services to its customers under the YETI Mark. The domain names correspond to Complainant's registered mark YETI, prefaced by the descriptive and/or generic terms "wrap" and either “your” or "my," and adding the ".com" top-level domain.

3.    Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names. Respondent is not commonly known by the domain names.

4.    Respondent is neither making a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names. Rather, the domain names both resolve to websites containing hyperlinks that redirect to the products of Complainant’s competitors.

5.    Respondent’s registration and use of the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names serves as a disruption of Complainant’s legitimate business purposes pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii) because of the inclusion of competing hyperlinks. 

6.    Respondent has attempted to attract Internet users to its site for commercial gain by creating confusion as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the websites according to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). Because Complainant’s trademark registrations for the YETI mark existed well before the registrations of the disputed domain names, Respondent had actual or at least constructive knowledge of Complainant's rights in the mark.

 

B. Respondent

1.    Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Respondent has consented to transfer the domain names <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> to Complainant.

 

DISCUSSION

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(f), 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 (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.”).

 

Preliminary Issue:  Consent to Transfer

 

The National Arbitration Forum was copied on documentation submitted from Respondent to the Forum and Complainant, which is identified in this proceeding as “Other Correspondence.”  In this document, Respondent purports to consent to the transfer of the domain names.  Respondent states as follows:

 

I am more than happy to release both WRAPMYYETI.COM and WRAPYOURYETI.COM to Yetti Coolers LLC

 

Because Respondent has not contested the transfer of the domain names but instead agrees to transfer the domain names in question to Complainant, the Panel will forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names.  See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant . . . Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.”).


DECISION

The Respondent has consented to transfer the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names to the Complainant.

 

It is Ordered that the <wrapmyyeti.com> and <wrapyouryeti.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

Bruce E. Meyerson Panelist

Dated:  July 11, 2016

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page