DECISION

 

Textron Innovations Inc. v. Domain Admin / Continental Motors Inc.

Claim Number: FA1609001693562

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Textron Innovations Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Jeremiah A. Pastrick, Indiana, USA.  Respondent is Domain Admin / Continental Motors Inc. (“Respondent”), represented by Stephen R. Ginger, Alabama, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES

The domain names at issue are <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero>, registered with EnCirca, Inc (455).

 

PANEL

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.

 

Dr. Katalin Szamosi as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on September 13, 2016; the Forum received payment on September 13, 2016.

 

On September 15, 2016, EnCirca, Inc (455) confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names are registered with EnCirca, Inc (455) and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names.  EnCirca, Inc (455) has verified that Respondent is bound by the EnCirca, Inc (455) 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 September 19, 2016, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of October 11, 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@lycoming.aero, postmaster@lycomingengines.aero.  Also on September 19, 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.

 

A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on September 26, 2016.

 

On October 04, 2016, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Dr. Katalin Szamosi 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.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

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

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

 

Complainant argues that Respondent’s <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names are identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark, in support of this Complainant asserts that:

 

1.    it has rights in the LYCOMING mark through its registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (Reg. No. 834,293, registered August 29, 1967).

2.    <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names are confusingly similar to the LYCOMING mark because they each contain the mark while the <lycomingengines.aero> domain name also contains the descriptive word “engines.”

 

Complainant argues that Respondent has no rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. In support of this Complainant asserts that

 

1.    Respondent is not commonly known by the <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names because it is not permitted to use the LYCOMING mark.

2.    Respondent fails to provide a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use because the resolving websites redirect to Respondent’s own website, which competes with Complainant in the maintenance and sale of aircraft engines.

 

Complainant argues that Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain names in bad faith. In support of this Complainant contends that

 

1.    Respondent uses the <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names in bad faith because the resolving websites redirect to Respondent’s own website, which competes with Complainant in the maintenance and sale of aircraft engines.

2.    Respondent registered the domain names in bad faith because it did so with actual knowledge of Complainant’s LYCOMING mark based on its longstanding use.

 

B. Respondent

 

While Respondent makes general and specific denials of all allegations made by Complainant, Respondent raises no objections to the transfer of the <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names to Complainant.

 

PRELIMINARY ISSUE: CONSENT TO TRANSFER

 

The Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain names but instead agrees to transfer the domain names in question to Complainant, therefore the Panel decides to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and orders an immediate transfer of the <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> 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.”); see also 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

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <lycoming.aero> and <lycomingengines.aero> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

dr. Katalin Szamosi, Panelist

Dated:  October 13, 2016

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page