URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
The Timken Company v. REDACTED PRIVACY
Claim Number: FA2202001985881
DOMAIN NAME
<timken.parts>
PARTIES
Complainant: The Timken Company of North Canton, OH, United States of America | |
Respondent: PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC of Jacksonville, FL, US | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Binky Moon, LLC | |
Registrars: Network Solutions, 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. | |
Alan L. Limbury, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: February 25, 2022 | |
Commencement: February 28, 2022 | |
Default Date: March 15, 2022 | |
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: Determined: Finding for Complainant Complainant has rights in the United States registered trademark TIMKEN Reg. No. 517520, registered on November 8, 1949. The <timken.parts> domain name is identical to Complainant's mark since the gTLD ",parts" may be ignored. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent is not known by the domain name, is a competitor of Complainant and is not using the domain name in a bona fide manner.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor. Further, by using the domain name Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to its web site by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark as to the affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's web site and of products on that web site . 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:
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:
|
Alan L. Limbury Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page