United States Postal Service v. Matt Brandenburg / IncomeInc, Inc. / Websites
Claim Number: FA1701001713095
Complainant is United States Postal Service (“Complainant”), represented by Nathaniel Edwards of Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP, Arizona, USA. Respondent is Matt Brandenburg / IncomeInc, Inc. / Websites (“Respondent”), Ohio, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz>, registered with Godaddy.Com, LLC; NameCheap, Inc.
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.
Darryl C. Wilson, as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on January 18, 2017; the Forum received payment on January 18, 2017.
On January 19, 2017 and January 26, 2017, Godaddy.Com, LLC and NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz> domain names are registered with Godaddy.Com, LLC and NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. Godaddy.Com, LLC and NameCheap, Inc. have verified that Respondent is bound by the Godaddy.Com, LLC and NameCheap, Inc. 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 January 31, 2017, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 21, 2017 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@uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net, postmaster@uspostofficechangeofaddress.com, postmaster@postofficechangeofaddress.org, postmaster@uspsaddresschange.online, postmaster@uspsaddresschange.site, postmaster@uspsaddresschange.website, postmaster@uspsaddresschange.xyz. Also on January 31, 2017, 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 March 6, 2017, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Darryl C. Wilson, 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.
Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant is a global provider of postal goods and services. Complainant uses the USPS, USPS CHANGE OF ADDRESS, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, and U.S. POST OFFICE marks [hereinafter “USPS marks”] in conjunction with its business practices. Complainant registered the USPS marks with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g. Reg. Nos. 3,162,989, registered Jan, 23, 2001; 4,769,509, registered July 7, 2015; 2,709,131, registered Apr. 22, 2003; 2,137,563, registered Feb. 17, 1998; 3,234,924, registered Apr. 24, 2007, respectively). Respondent’s <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz> are confusingly similar to Complainant’s USPS marks because all of the domain names include variations of the USPS marks, some in their entirety, while eliminating spaces, transposing words, spelling out acronyms, and adding generic top level domains (“gTLDs”).
Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz>. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names. Complainant has not authorized or licensed Respondent to use the USPS marks in any regard, nor is Respondent affiliated with Complainant. Respondent has not made a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the domain. Respondent’s <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, and <postofficechangeofaddress.org> resolve to parked pages displaying messages such as “website coming soon!” and “This Web page is parked FREE, courtesy of GoDaddy.com.” Respondent’s <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz> redirect to the webpage <uspsaddresschange.jimdo.com> with the intent to pass itself off as Complainant, offering change of address services for Respondent’s profit.
Respondent registered and is using the <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz> domains in bad faith. Respondent registered at least eight different domain names infringing on Complainant’s USPS marks, thereby showing a pattern of bad faith registrations and cybersquatting. Additionally, four of the disputed domain names direct internet users to a phishing website, passing itself off as Complainant. Respondent’s business is fraud under state and federal consumer protection laws due to its deceptive practices of offering Complainant’s change of address services for a fee, further evincing bad faith. Respondent registered the disputed domain names with actual knowledge of Complainant and its rights to the USPS marks.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant is United States Postal Service of Washington D.C., USA. Complainant is the owner of domestic registrations for the marks USPS, USPS CHANGE OF ADDRESS, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, and U.S. POST OFFICE, which it has continuously used in the above manner and related variations thereof, since at least as early as 1871, in connection with its mailing and shipping goods and services.
Respondent is Matt Brandenburg / IncomeInc, Inc. / Websites, of Dayton Ohio, USA. Respondent’s registrar’s addresses are listed as Scottsdale and Phoenix, AZ, USA. The Panel notes that Respondent registered <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, and <postofficechangeofaddress.org> on or about August 27, 2016; and <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz> on or about September 14, 2016.
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: Multiple Respondents
In the instant proceedings, Complainant has alleged that the entities controlling the domain names at issue are effectively controlled by the same person and/or entity, which is operating under several aliases. Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”) provides that a “complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder.” Complainant contends that the registrar of the disputed domain names is “Matt Brandenburg.” Despite differences in physical addresses, company names, and associated phone numbers, “[t]he Domain Names are obviously owned or controlled by a single registrant.” Complainant asserts that the differences in WHOIS information is “attributable to the fact that the registrant Matt Brandenburg used fraudulent information to register some of the Domain Names.”
The Panel finds that Complainant has sufficiently presented evidence demonstrating that the listed entities are jointly controlled.
Preliminary Issue: Consent to Transfer
The Forum received copies of documentation submitted on several occasions by the Respondent identified in this proceeding as “Correspondence – Respondent.” In these documents, Respondent reflects the desire to transfer the disputed domain name(s) to Complainant, making statements such as;
“We would be happy to transfer all domains requested to your registrar account at any point, I have offered this previously using the URDP email contacts given to me by namecheap and godaddy to no response, please let us know how to proceed, thank you.”
The Panel notes that it is under no obligation to acknowledge such documents; nonetheless, the Panel does recognize the correspondence and finds it helpful in resolving the present dispute. Under the present circumstances, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain name, but instead agrees to transfer the domain name in question to Complainant, the Panel finds it unnecessary to apply the traditional UDRP analysis and instead orders an immediate transfer of the <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz> 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.”).
Respondent has consented to transfer.
Respondent has consented to transfer.
Respondent has consented to transfer.
As Respondent has consented to transfer the domain names, the Panel concludes that Complainant’s requested relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <uspostalservicechangeofaddress.net>, <uspostofficechangeofaddress.com>, <postofficechangeofaddress.org>, <uspsaddresschange.online>, <uspsaddresschange.site>, <uspsaddresschange.website>, and <uspsaddresschange.xyz>domain names be immediately TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Darryl C. Wilson, Panelist
Dated: March 20, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page