Philip Morris Products S.A. v. WhoisGuard, Inc.
Claim Number: FA1811001815601
Complainant: Philip Morris Products S.A., of Neuchâtel, Switzerland.
Complainant Representative: Boehmert & Boehmert Anwaltspartnerschaft mbB, of Berlin, Germany.
Respondent: WhoisGuard, Inc. / WhoisGuard Protected, of Panama, Panama, International, PA.
Respondent Representative: None
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DotOnline Inc.
Registrars: 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 Examiner in this proceeding.
Jeffrey M. Samuels, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: November 9, 2018
Commencement: November 9, 2018
Default Date: November 27, 2018
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").
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant is an international tobacco company, with products sold in more than 180 markets. In 2014, Complainant launched an electronic hearing device into which specially designed tobacco sticks (branded HEETS) are inserted and heated to generate a flavorful nicotine-containing aerosol. Complainant adopted and uses the trademark IQOS in connection with this device. The IQOS trademark is the subject of numerous trademark registrations and is also registered with the TMCH.
The disputed domain name was registered on April 25, 2018. The domain name reverts to a website advertising Complainant’s IQOS and HEETS branded products. The website holds out to be an official dealer by prominently using Complainant’s IQOS mark in the domain name and at the top of the site.
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.
1. The Examiner finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the mark IQOS, for which Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and is in current use. The domain name incorporates the mark in full. While the domain name also includes the letters “tr,” such fact does not negate a finding of confusing similarity, given that the first four letters of the domain name correspond to Complainant’s mark. The addition of the non-distinctive top-level domain “.online” also does not dispel a finding of confusing similarity.
2. The Examiner finds Registrant has no legitimate right or interest in the disputed domain name. The evidence establishes that Respondent and its website are not in any way affiliated to Complainant and that Complainant has not authorized Respondent’s registration and/or use of the disputed domain name.
3. The Examiner finds that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The evidence establishes that, by using a domain name incorporating Complainant’s mark, Respondent is attempting to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users looking for Complainant’s goods and purposefully misleading users as to the source of the website.
After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that
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 be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:
iqostr.online.
Jeffrey M. Samuels, Examiner
Dated: November 27, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page