Christopher T.C. Smith and American Green Cross v. Educational Video Network
Claim Number: FA0707001036640
Complainant is Christopher T.C. Smith and American
Green Cross (“Complainant”),
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <americangreencross.org>, registered with eNom, 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.
James A. Carmody, Esq., as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum
On July 16, 2007, eNom, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <americangreencross.org> domain name is registered with eNom, Inc. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. eNom, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the eNom, Inc. registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On July 24, 2007, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of August 13, 2007 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to firstname.lastname@example.org by e-mail.
A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on
The Complainant filed an Additional Submission in hard copy only (electronic mail submission is also required) and was thus defective. Notwithstanding, the Panel elected to consider the Additional Submission.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
1. Respondent’s <americangreencross.org> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s AMERICAN GREEN CROSS mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name at issue.
3. Respondent registered and used the domain name at issue in bad faith.
1. Respondent registered the domain name at issue in 1998, many years before any alleged use by Complainant of the AMERICAN GREEN CROSS MARK.
2. Respondent is using the domain name at issue in connection with a religious entity.
3. Respondent did not register and is not using the domain name at issue in bad faith.
C. Additional Submissions
Complainant filed a defective Additional Submission which was considered by the Panel but which did not address the defenses of the Respondent.
Complainant is the owner of an application to register the mark AMERICAN GREEN CROSS with the U. S. Patent & Trademark Office, Serial number 78753027. The application for such registration was made on November 14, 2005 with no date of first use in commerce shown on the application record provided. In the Complaint, there is no allegation of common law use prior to November of 2005. Apparently, Complainant uses the mark in connection with a charitable organization dedicated to environmental protection and operates a website at <americangreencross.net> in support of these activities. Complainant alleges that Respondent has not been given license to use Complainant’s AMERICAN GREEN CROSS mark, that Respondent warehouses many domain names that he does not legitimately use and he is using the domain name at issue in bad faith.
Respondent points out that he registered the domain name at issue in
1998, roughly seven years prior to Complainant’s application for registration
of the AMERICAN GREEN CROSS mark.
Further, Respondent has used or permitted the domain name at issue to be
used in connection with the activities of the
Nowhere in the materials presented to the Panel is there any evidence that the Complainant used the AMERICAN GREEN CROSS mark prior to Respondent’s registration of the domain name at issue.
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”) instructs this Panel to “decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable.”
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that the Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Having failed to satisfy all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be DENIED.
James A. Carmody, Esq., Panelist
Dated: September 4, 2007
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National Arbitration Forum