URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
Cerner Corporation v. Fulai Chen
Claim Number: FA1610001698981
DOMAIN NAME
<cerner.store>
PARTIES
Complainant: Cerner Corporation of Kansas City, MO, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP
Leonard Searcy of Kansas City, MO, United States of America
|
Respondent: Fulai Chen of Guangzhou, GuangDong, II, CN | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DotStore Inc. | |
Registrars: Go Daddy, LLC |
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. | |
Darryl C. Wilson, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: October 19, 2016 | |
Commencement: October 20, 2016 | |
Default Date: November 4, 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
Procedural Findings: | ||
Multiple Complainants: N.A. | ||
Multiple Respondents: N.A. |
Findings of Fact: Complainant has accumulated substantial public goodwill and acquired extensive rights in the CERNER® mark, and owns numerous registered trademarks for the mark and related variations thereof. The domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CERNER® mark. Complainant has been using the mark continuously in commerce since January 1985, and registered the mark in September 1987. |
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 domain name incorporates the CERNER® mark by adding the top-level domain (“TLD”) “.store.” Respondent’s registration and use of <cerner.store> violates Policy ¶ 1.2.6.1 because it is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CERNER® mark, and is misleading and causes confusion to consumers. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant No available evidence suggests that Respondent has ever been commonly known by the domain name. Complainant submits that the domain name at issue is not the nickname of Respondent or in any other way identified with or related to a legitimate interest of Respondent. The WHOIS information demonstrates that Fulai Chen is not commonly known by the domain name. Therefore, pursuant to Policy ¶ 1.2.6.2, Fulai Chen lacks rights and legitimate interests in the domain name. Complainant has not licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to use Complainant’s mark or to apply for or use any domain name incorporating Complainant’s CERNER® mark.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent’s attempt to pass off <cerner.store> as being affiliated with Complainant constitutes disruption and bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 1.2.6.3.d. Respondent’s domain name resolves to a website which displays a link that offers the purchase of the domain name. It also appears that Respondent registered the domain name to entice Complainant to purchase the domain. Respondent’s use of the domain name disrupts Complainant’s business and diverts Internet users seeking Complainant’s website. Respondent’s use of the domain name is evidence of bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 1.2.6.3.c. 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:
Complainant provided proof of all the required elements and Respondent failed to file an answer in these proceedings.
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:
|
Darryl C. Wilson Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page