URS FINAL DETERMINATION

Foot Locker Retail, Inc. v. DANIELE TORNATORE et al.
Claim Number: FA1606001680981

DOMAIN NAME

<footlocker.cloud>

PARTIES

	Complainant: Foot Locker Retail, Inc. Joy Echer of New York, NY, United States of America
	Complainant Representative: Kelley Drye & Warren LLP Amy Gaven of New York, NY, United States of America

	Respondent: Daniele Tornatore of Cercola, II, Italy

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

	Registries: ARUBA S.p.A.
	Registrars: Tucows Domains 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.
	Richard W. Hill, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

	Complainant Submitted: June 24, 2016
	Commencement: June 27, 2016
	Response Date: July 5, 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: Respondent replies in English, therefore this determination is in English. Respondent states that he did not know that FOOT LOCKER was an active trademark, that he has no interest in the use of the disputed domain name, that he did not register it in bad faith, that it is not being used, and that he is willing to give it up at no cost. Since Respondent is willing to give up the disputed domain name, the Examiner will order its suspension without examining the elements of the Policy.

URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, 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:
  (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
  (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
  (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

For the reasons mentioned above, it is not necessary to examine this element of the Policy.

[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

For the reasons mentioned above, it is not necessary to examine this element of the Policy.

[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
  a. Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
  b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
  c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
  d. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

For the reasons mentioned above, it is not necessary to examine this element of the Policy.

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:

The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods.

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:

footlocker.cloud

Richard W. Hill
Examiner
Dated: July 6, 2016

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page