Gulf States Financial Services, Inc. v. Fletcher Garth (GSFS) / gsfsgroup
Claim Number: FA2305002044049
Complainant is Gulf States Financial Services, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Thomas L. Warden of Conley Rose, P.C., Texas, USA. Respondent is Fletcher Garth (GSFS) / gsfsgroup (“Respondent”), New York, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <gsfsgroups.co>, registered with Key-Systems GmbH.
PANEL
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.
Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on May 10, 2023. Forum received payment on May 16, 2023.
On May 12, 2023, Key-Systems GmbH confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <gsfsgroups.co> domain name is registered with Key-Systems GmbH and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Key-Systems GmbH has verified that Respondent is bound by the Key-Systems GmbH 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 May 23, 2023, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 12, 2023 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@gsfsgroups.co. Also on May 23, 2023, 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, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On June 20, 2023, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that 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, 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 name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant, Gulf States Financial Services, Inc., offers financial and insurance services for the automotive industry. Complainant has rights to the GSFSGROUP mark through its registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO. Respondent’s <gsfsgroups.co> domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark.
Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the <gsfsgroups.co> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name, nor has Complainant authorized, licensed, or otherwise permitted Respondent to use the mark. Respondent also does not use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, Respondent uses the domain name to impersonate an employee of Complainant in the furtherance of an email phishing scheme.
Respondent registered and uses the <gsfsgroups.co> domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the confusingly similar nature of the domain name to send fraudulent phishing emails, attempting to pass itself off as an employee of Complainant for commercial gain.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.
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 set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) (“Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint”).
Complainant has shown that it has rights in the GSFSGROUP mark through registrations with the USPTO (e.g. Reg. No. 2,876,173, registered on August 24, 2004). The Panel finds Respondent’s <gsfsgroups.co> domain name to be virtually identical and confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark as it incorporates the mark in whole, adding only the letter “s” and the inconsequential TLD “.co”, which may be ignored.
Complainant has established this element.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
(i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
The <gsfsgroups.co> domain name was registered on April 6, 2023 in the name of an employee of Complainant. That day, Respondent used the domain name to send an email impersonating that employee, seeking payment of money owing to Complainant into a bank account nominated by Respondent, not being a bank account of Complainant.
These circumstances, together with Complainant’s assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <gsfsgroups.co> domain name. See JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Dryx Emerson / KMF Events LTD, FA1906001849706 (Forum July 17, 2019). Respondent has made no attempt to do so.
The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name.
Complainant has established this element.
Bad Faith
The four illustrative circumstances set out in paragraph 4(b) of the Policy as evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) are not exclusive.
The circumstances set out above in relation to the fourth element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant’s GSFSGROUP mark when Respondent registered the <gsfsgroups.co> domain name and that Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith for the purpose of phishing for commercial gain by masquerading as an employee of Complainant.
Complainant has established this element.
DECISION
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <gsfsgroups.co> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Alan L. Limbury, Panelist
Dated: June 21, 2023.
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page