State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Adrian Moga
Claim Number: FA0909001282839
Complainant is State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Complainant”), represented by Debra
J. Monk, of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Company,
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN
NAME
The domain name at issue is <the-statefarminsurance.com>, registered with Wild West Domains, 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.
Louis E. Condon as Panelist.
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 October 5, 2009, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Louis E. Condon as Panelist.
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 <the-statefarminsurance.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s STATE FARM INSURANCE mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <the-statefarminsurance.com> domain name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <the-statefarminsurance.com> domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant, State Farm
Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, was founded in 1930 as an insurance
provider. Complainant holds several
trademark registrations with the United States Patent and Trademark Office
(“USPTO”) for the STATE FARM INSURANCE mark (See, e.g., Reg. No.
1,125,010 issued
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 by registering the STATE FARM INSURANCE
(Reg. No. 1,125,010 issued
The <the-statefarminsurance.com>
domain name adds the article “the,” a hyphen, and a generic top-level domain
(”gTLD”) “.com” to Complainant’s STATE FARM INSURANCE mark with the spaces
removed. The Panel finds that these
changes result in the disputed domain name being confusingly similar to
Complainant’s mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See John Fairfax Publ’ns Pty Ltd. v. Pro-Life Domains Not for
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 <the-statefarminsurance.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 disputed domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Since no response was submitted in this
case, the Panel may presume that Respondent has no rights or legitimate
interests in the disputed domain names. 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
Complainant contends that Respondent has not been granted
any license of permission to use the STATE FARM INSURANCE mark and is not
commonly known by the <the-statefarminsurance.com>
domain name. The WHOIS information
associated with the disputed domain name identifies Respondent as “Adrian Moga.”
The Panel finds no evidence in the record to indicate that Respondent is
commonly known by the disputed domain name.
Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent has not established rights
and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name pursuant to Policy ¶
4(c)(ii). See IndyMac Bank F.S.B. v. Eshback, FA 830934 (Nat. Arb. Forum
Respondent is using the disputed domain name to resolve to a
website containing links to third-party websites, some of which directly
compete with Complainant’s insurance business.
Accordingly, the Panel infers that Respondent receives click-through
fees for displaying these hyperlinks.
The Panel finds that this is a diversion of Internet users for
Respondent’s commercial benefit, and is therefore not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy
¶ 4(c)(iii). See ALPITOUR S.p.A. v. balata inc, FA 888649 (Nat. Arb. Forum
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
The <the-statefarminsurance.com>
domain name, which was registered on
Respondent is using the <the-statefarminsurance.com>
domain name to display links to sites that are related to and in direct
competition with Complainant’s business.
The Panel infers that Respondent receives either pay-per-click or
advertising fees for these advertisements.
Since the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s
mark, Internet users are likely to be confused as to Complainant’s affiliation
with, or sponsorship of, the disputed domain name and resolving website. The Panel finds this is evidence of bad faith
registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Am. Univ. v. Cook, FA 208629 (Nat. Arb. Forum
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief should be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <the-statefarminsurance.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Louis E. Condon, Panelist
Dated: October 8, 2009
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National
Arbitration Forum