JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Luis Alejandro Bolivar Aramayo
Claim Number: FA1906001846642
Complainant is JUUL Labs, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Chelsea E. Carbone of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, California, USA. Respondent is Luis Alejandro Bolivar Aramayo (“Respondent”), Bolivia.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <juulbolivia.com> (“Domain Name”), registered with FastDomain 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.
Nicholas J.T. Smith as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on June 5, 2019; the Forum received payment on June 5, 2019.
On June 5, 2019, FastDomain Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <juulbolivia.com> domain name is registered with FastDomain Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. FastDomain Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the FastDomain 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 June 12, 2019, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of July 2, 2019 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@juulbolivia.com. Also on June 12, 2019, 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.
On June 13, 2019, the Forum received a series of e-mails from the Respondent, the final one stating that as the Respondent’s “client” did not have any right to use the Domain Name, the Respondent was prepared to transfer the Domain Name to the Complainant.
On July 5, 2019, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Nicholas J.T. Smith 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 Name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant operates in the vaporizer and smoking-alternative industry. Complainant has rights in the JUUL mark through its registration of the mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g. Reg. No. 4,818,664, registered Sep. 22, 2015). Respondent’s <juulbolivia.com> domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark as it adds the geographic term “Bolivia” to Complainant’s fully incorporated mark.
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <juulbolivia.com> domain name. Respondent is not known by the Domain Name, nor has Complainant 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 pass off as Complainant and offer for sale counterfeit or unauthorized versions of Complainant’s products.
Respondent registered and uses the <juulbolivia.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the Domain Name to lure Internet users to Respondent’s own website branded with Complainant’s mark and offers for sale counterfeit or unauthorized versions of Complainant’s products. Respondent likely uses the Domain Name to gather personal information of Internet users. Finally, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the JUUL mark based on Respondent’s attempt to sell fraudulent or unauthorized versions of Complainant’s products.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a formal Response in this proceeding but in its informal communication agreed to transfer the Domain Name to the Complainant.
Respondent consents to transfer the <juulbolivia.com> domain name to Complainant. However, after the initiation of this proceeding, FastDomain Inc. placed a hold on Respondent’s account and therefore Respondent cannot transfer the Domain Name while this proceeding is still pending.
In a circumstance such as this, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the Domain Name, but instead agrees to transfer the Domain Name to Complainant, the Panel is authorized to forego the traditional UDRP analysis. This Panel, in recognition of the common request of the parties, in the interests of judicial expedience, and in the absence of any aggravating circumstances, has so decided to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and to order an immediate transfer of the <juulbolivia.com> domain name. 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.”).
As the remedy of the Complainant and the request of the Respondent both sought to transfer the Domain Name from the Respondent to the Complainant, the Panel concludes that such relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <juulbolivia.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Nicholas J.T. Smith, Panelist
Dated: July 6, 2019
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page