Claim Number: FA0903001251890
Complainant is Victoria's Secret Stores Brand
Management, Inc. (“Complainant”),
represented by Melise R. Blakeslee, of McDermott Will & Emery LLP,
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <victoriassecrettoybox.com>, registered with Register.com, Inc.
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 Panelist in this proceeding.
Darryl C. Wilson as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on March 11, 2009; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on March 12, 2009.
On March 13, 2009, Register.com, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <victoriassecrettoybox.com> domain name is registered with Register.com, Inc. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Register.com, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Register.com, 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 March 17, 2009, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of April 6, 2009 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 email@example.com by e-mail.
A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on April 6, 2009.
On April 14, 2009, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Darryl C. Wilson as Panelist.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
Complainant contends that it is the owner of the
Respondent provided a brief response consisting of approximately ten (10) short sentences. Included in Respondent’s brief response was the sentence, “I have not intentions to Arbitrate this I have no intentions to keep this domain name. I have notified Registar.com they will be taking the domain back an may name off.[sic]” Respondent also stated “the name was never used” and “I was not aware that it was an infringement….”
In 2008 Complainant sold more than $5 billion of merchandise in connection with or directly bearing its trademark. Complainant is the owner by registration and/or assignment of 20 valid registrations in the United States Patent and Trademark (USPTO) office and the VICTORIA’S SECRET trademark has been recognized by numerous UDRP panels as being well established, well know and famous.
Respondent, Annette Manta, is an individual who states that she has not used the domain name and who is not commonly known by the disputed domain as an individual, business or other organization.
Respondent’s response was received in electronic copy, but not in hard copy, prior to the response deadline. As such the response failed to comply with ICANN Rule 5. Respondent’s statement in the response also indicated that Respondent was not asserting a defense to the allegations of the Complaint and thus acceding to the demands of the Complainant. See Six Continents Hotels, Inc. v. Nowak, D2003-0022 (WIPO Mar. 4, 2003) (holding that the respondent’s failure to submit a hard copy of the response and its failure to include any evidence to support a finding in its favor placed the respondent in a de facto default posture, permitting the panel to draw all appropriate inferences stated in the complaint).
Respondent stated that she was not desirous of arbitration and that she was asking her registrar to take her name off the domain thus indicating that she is willing to accept a finding transferring the disputed domain to the Complainant. See Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Nat. Arb. 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.”)
The panel agrees that in light of the Respondent’s stated desires to forego arbitration and to concede to relinquishing her rights in the disputed domain name that it is unnecessary to proceed through the standard UDRP analysis and that a summary decision in favor of the Complainant granting Complainant’s requested relief is appropriate.
The Panel thus orders that the domain name in dispute be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.
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.
See FINDINGS above.
See FINDINGS above.
See FINDINGS above.
Since the Respondent has agreed to give up all rights in the disputed domain name the Panel concludes that the Complainant’s requested relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <victoriassecrettoybox.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Prof. Darryl C. Wilson, Panelist
Dated: April 28, 2009
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National Arbitration Forum