Amino Up Co., Ltd. v. Ahmet Karadag
Claim Number: FA2207002005210
Complainant: Amino Up Co., Ltd. of Sapporo, Japan.
Complainant Representative: Rechtsanwalt Michael Hoffmann of Walluf, Germany.
Respondent: AHMET KARADAG / Ahmet Karadağ Tekstil Bilişim San ve Tic LTD ŞTİ of İstanbul, İstanbul, International, TR.
REGISTRY and REGISTRAR
Registry: GMO Registry, Inc.
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
Debrett Gordon Lyons, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: July 22, 2022
Commencement: July 26, 2022
Response Date: August 2, 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").
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant is a biotechnology company that develops, manufactures and sells naturally derived products by reference to the trademark, AHCC.
That trademark is registered and in use.
Respondent argues that the letters AHCC are a known abbreviation for products which Respondent offers for sale at a website resolving from the domain name.
Panel notes that at least one of Complainant’s trademark registrations is subject to pending cancellation proceedings.
1.2.6.1. that the registered domain name is 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.
No findings required.
1.2.6.2. that the Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
The Examiner does not find clear and convincing evidence that Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
1.2.6.3. that the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith.
No findings required.
Respondent has alleged that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding and/or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner does not find that to be so. It finds no material falsehoods and finds that Complainant has brought what it believed to be a true and sustainable claim.
After reviewing the parties’ submissions, the Examiner determines that
the Complainant has NOT demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name be RETURNED to the control of Respondent.
Debrett Gordon Lyons, Examiner
Dated: August 4, 2022
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page