DECISION

 

Snap Inc. v. sebastien cadran / webmaster

Claim Number: FA1911001869959

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Snap Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by David K. Caplan of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, California, USA.  Respondent is sebastien cadran / webmaster (“Respondent”), France.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <snap-sexe.com>, registered with OVH sas.

 

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.

 

Charles A. Kuechenmeister, Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on November 5, 2019; the Forum received payment on November 5, 2019.

 

On December 4, 2019, OVH sas confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <snap-sexe.com> domain name (the Domain Name) is registered with OVH sas and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  OVH sas has verified that Respondent is bound by the OVH sas 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 December 6, 2019, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint setting a deadline of December 26, 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@snap-sexe.com.  Also on December 6, 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.

 

A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on December 18, 2019.

 

On December 23, 2019, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Charles A. Kuechenmeister 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.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the Domain Name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PRELIMINARY ISSUE

Respondent Consent to Transfer

The FORUM received email correspondence from Respondent on December 16, 2019, and on December 18, 2019 it received another electronically-transmitted document which, while not meeting all of the technical requirements for a response provided by Rule 5(c), may reasonably be taken as such.  Both communications expressed a willingness on the part of Respondent to transfer the Domain Name to Complainant.  See, email dated December 16, 2019 (“I thought that this complaint was a fake, especially the received turned screens (with text in Chinese, Russian etc ...).  Therefore, this week, the site will be redirected to snap.com.  Sorry for the inconvenience, cordially, the webmaster.”), and email dated December 18, 2019 (“All the content on the site http://www.snap-sexe.com has been removed and a few days ago the site was redirected to https//www.snap.com.  I agree never to use the site http//www.snap-sexe.com and leave this domain name in redirection until its renewal date (the renewal has been cancelled on my side).”).  These messages appear to be authentic.  

As required by Policy ¶ 8(a), upon notice of the commencement of this proceeding, the registrar, OVH sas, placed a hold on Respondent’s account.  Respondent therefore cannot transfer the Domain Name while this proceeding is pending.  Under these circumstances, where Respondent does not contest the transfer of the Domain Name but instead consents to a transfer to Complainant, the Panel may forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the 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), Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat Arb. 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.”), 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”).  This Panel elects to adopt this approach and will order the transfer of the Domain Name without a UDRP analysis.

 

DECISION

Based upon the consent of Respondent to transfer the Domain Name to Complainant, the Panel concludes that that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <snap-sexe.com> Domain Name be TRANSFERRED to Complainant.

 

Charles A. Kuechenmeister, Panelist

Dated:  December 24, 2019