The American Automobile Association, Inc. v. Alexander Velinov c/o SAVANT
Claim Number: FA0907001271541
Complainant is The American Automobile Association, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Peter
D. Saharko, of
REGISTRAR
The domain name at issue is <aaatripinsurance.com>, registered with Godaddy.com, 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.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to
the National Arbitration Forum electronically on
On
On
Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the National Arbitration Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent." Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the National Arbitration Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
1. Respondent’s <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s AAA mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant, The American Automobile Association, Inc., has used the AAA mark since at
least as early as 1902. Complainant
holds several trademark registrations of the AAA mark with the United States
Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) in connection with various services,
including providing insurance (Reg. No. 829,265 issued
Respondent registered the <aaatripinsurance.com>
domain name on
Paragraph 15(a) of 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."
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc. v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson, D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”).
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that 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 Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(2) 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.
The Panel finds that Complainant’s
multiple, long-standing trademark registrations with the USPTO establish its
rights in the AAA mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Microsoft Corp. v. Burkes,
FA 652743 (Nat. Arb. Forum
Complainant
contends that Respondent’s <aaatripinsurance.com>
domain name contains Complainant’s AAA mark
followed by the generic terms “trip insurance” and the generic top-level domain
(“gTLD”) “.com.” The Panel finds that the addition of a gTLD is irrelevant under Policy ¶
4(a)(i). The Panel finds that the
addition of a term that describes Complainant’s business renders the disputed
domain name confusingly similar to the mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Gardline Surveys
Ltd. v. Domain Fin. Ltd., FA
153545 (Nat. Arb. Forum
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Pursuant to Policy
¶ 4(a)(ii), Complainant must first establish a prima
facie case that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name. If
the Panel finds that Complainant’s allegations establish such a prima facie case,
the burden shifts to Respondent to show that it does indeed have rights or
legitimate interests in the disputed domain name pursuant to the guidelines in
Policy ¶ 4(c). The Panel finds
that Complainant’s allegations are sufficient to establish a prima facie case that Respondent has no
rights or legitimate interests in the <aaatripinsurance.com>
domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Because
no response was submitted in this case, the Panel may presume that Respondent
has no rights or legitimate interests in the <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name. However, the Panel will still
examine the record in consideration of the factors listed in Policy ¶ 4(c). See Domtar, Inc. v. Theriault., FA 1089426 (Nat. Arb.
Forum
The Panel finds no evidence in the record suggesting that
Respondent is commonly known by the <aaatripinsurance.com>
domain name. Complainant asserts that
Respondent has no license or agreement with Complainant authorizing Respondent
to use the AAA mark, and the WHOIS
information identifies Respondent as “
Respondent is using the <aaatripinsurance.com>
domain name to resolve to a commercial website offering insurance services that
directly compete with Complainant’s services.
Respondent’s use of a domain name that is confusingly similar to
Complainant’s AAA mark to redirect
Internet users to a competing website is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ (4)(c)(i),
nor is it a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Coryn Group,
Inc. v. Media Insight, FA 198959 (Nat.
Arb. Forum
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
Respondent’s use of
Complainant’s AAA mark in the <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name to redirect Internet users to a competing insurance services website
suggests that Respondent registered the disputed domain name intending to
disrupt Complainant’s business. The
Panel finds that this is evidence of bad faith registration and use under
Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii).
See S. Exposure v.
S. Exposure, Inc., FA 94864 (Nat. Arb. Forum
Under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv), a respondent
is acting in bad faith when using a confusingly similar domain name to attract
Internet users for commercial gain. In
this case, Respondent is using the <aaatripinsurance.com>
domain name to attract users to a competing insurance services website. The Panel finds that the disputed domain name
is capable of creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark and
that Respondent has sought to profit from this confusion through a commercial
website. The Panel finds Respondent
registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶
4(b)(iv). See Computerized
Sec. Sys., Inc. v. Hu, FA 157321 (Nat. Arb. Forum
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <aaatripinsurance.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Dated: August 11, 2009
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National
Arbitration Forum