URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


Bloomberg Finance L.P. v. Privacy Protection
Claim Number: FA2109001967092


DOMAIN NAME

<bloomberg.bar>


PARTIES


   Complainant: Bloomberg Finance L.P. Melonie Callender of New York, NY, United States of America
  

   Respondent: Privacy Protection Privacy Protection of Chicago, IL, US
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS


   Registries: Punto 2012 Sociedad Anonima Promotora de Inversion de Capital Variable
   Registrars: Sav.com, LLC

EXAMINER


   The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
   Richard W. Hill, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY


   Complainant Submitted: September 30, 2021
   Commencement: September 30, 2021
   Default Date: October 15, 2021
   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").

RELIEF SOUGHT


   Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.

STANDARD OF REVIEW


   Clear and convincing evidence.

FINDINGS and DISCUSSION



   Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment]

  

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.


[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word mark:
  (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
  (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
  (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


Complainant has rights in the mark BLOOMBERG through its registration in the United States in 2008. The disputed domain name incorporates Complainant's mark in its entirety, merely adding the gTDL ".bar". Consequently, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to Complainant's mark.


[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


Complainant had not licensed or otherwise authorized Complainant to use its mark. The registrant of the disputed domain name is "Privacy Protection" and nothing in the record indicates that Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name. The resolving website offers the disputed domain name for sale for a price in excess of out-of-pocket-costs. Thus the Panel finds that Respondent does not have legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name.


[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
  a. Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
  b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
  c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
  d. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant's web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant's web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The resolving website offers the disputed domain name for sale for a price in excess of out-of-pocket-costs. This constitutes bad faith registration and use.


FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD


The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods.

The Examiner finds as follows:


  1. The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods. 

DETERMINATION


After reviewing the parties submissions, the Examiner determines that the 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(s) be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:

  1. bloomberg.bar

 

Richard W. Hill
Examiner
Dated: October 15, 2021

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page