NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM

 

DECISION

Sutter Home Winery Inc. v. Texas International Property Associates- NA NA

Claim Number: FA0903001252751

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Sutter Home Winery, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by John M. Rannells, of Baker and Rannells PA, New Jersey, USA.  Respondent is Texas International Property Associates- NA NA (“Respondent”), represented by Gary Wayne Tucker, of Law Office of Gary Wayne Tucker, Texas, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME 

The domain name at issue is <sutterhomewines.com>, registered with Compana, LLC.

 

PANEL

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.

 

The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on March 17, 2009; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on March 18, 2009.

 

On March 18, 2009, Compana, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <sutterhomewines.com> domain name is registered with Compana, LLC and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  Compana, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the Compana, LLC 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 18, 2009, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of April 7, 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 postmaster@sutterhomewines.com by e-mail.

 

A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on April 7, 2009.

 

Complainant submitted an Additional Submission to the National Arbitration Forum on April 13, 2009, which was deemed timely in accordance with the National Arbitration Forum’s Supplemental Rule 7. 

 

On April 14, 2009 pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed the Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS

 

A.  Complainant makes the following assertions:

 

(1)   Respondent’s <sutterhomewines.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s SUTTER HOME mark.

 

(2)   Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <sutterhomewines.com> domain name.

 

(3)   Respondent registered and used the <sutterhomewines.com> domain name in bad faith.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent consents to the transfer of the domain name to Complainant.  Respondent requests that the Panel order the immediate transfer of the domain name without a decision on the merits.

 

C. Complainant’s Additional Submission

Complainant requests the transfer based on a full analysis under paragraph 4(a) of the

Policy because of Respondent’s practice of registering well-known trademarks of others, collecting pay-per-click fees from such sites, falsely committing to transfer such domains upon receipt of a cease and desist letter, and causing the trademark owners to expend time and money to force transfer.

 

CONSENT TO TRANSFER

Respondent consents to transfer the <sutterhomewines.com> domain name to Complainant.  As a result, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain name but instead agrees to transfer the domain name in question to Complainant, the Panel may decide to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the disputed domain name.  See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also 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.”).

 

Therefore, in the interest of judicial economy, the Panel declines to analyze the case under the elements of the UDRP because Respondent has consented to the transfer. See Citigroup Inc. v. Tex. Int’l Prop. Assoc.- NA NA, FA 1210904 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 5, 2008) (“There is no need for a decision or findings on the merits where the respondent, by consenting to the requested relief, obviates the necessity for such a ruling.”).

 

DECISION

Based upon Respondent’s consent to transfer, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <sutterhomewines.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.), Panelist

Dated: April 30, 2009

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

 

Click Here to return to our Home Page

 

National Arbitration Forum