Hargrave Arts LLC c/o Carter Hargrave v. Chiefasian LLC c/o Martin Eng
Claim Number: FA0911001294273
Arts LLC c/o Carter Hargrave (“Complainant”),
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <jeetkunedo.com>, 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.
David A. Einhorn appointed as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint
to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on
A timely Response was
received and determined to be complete on
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
Complainant makes the following contentions:
(1) Respondent's <jeetkunedo.com> domain name is identical to Complainant's JEET KUNE DO common law mark.
(2) Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <jeetkunedo.com> domain name.
(3) Respondent registered and used the <jeetkunedo.com> domain name in bad faith.
Respondent contends that Complainant has no rights to the mark JEET KUNE DO.
claims to own common law rights in the term JEET KUNE DO, which refers to a
form of martial arts. Jeet Kune Do was founded in the late 1960's by martial
arts expert, Bruce Lee. Complainant is one of approximately 50 certified Jeet
Kune Do instructors worldwide. Complainant claims to have been a student of the
Bruce Lee Jeet Kune Do School in
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy 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.
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
to affect a transfer of a domain name under the UDRP, Complainant must show
that it possesses rights in a mark that is identical or confusingly similar to
the disputed domain name. Complainant alleges that it acquired rights to the
mark from Bruce Lee and the Bruce Lee Jeet Kune Do School and asks that the
disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant, not to Bruce Lee.
Complainant provides no evidence to the Panel that it has any arrangement to
represent Bruce Lee or the Bruce Lee Jeet Kune Do School, or that any rights in
the JEET KUNE DO mark have been assigned or licensed to Complainant. Absent any
additional evidence, Complainant does not have standing to bring this claim
under the UDRP. See CMG Worldwide, Inc. v. Pitanguy Plastic Surgical Clinic,
FA 155888 (Nat. Arb. Forum
As Complainant has failed to show standing with respect to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights, it is unnecessary for the Panel to address the second and third elements of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy (legitimate interests and bad faith).
Complainant having failed to show standing, the Panel concludes that relief shall be DENIED without prejudice.
David A. Einhorn, Panelist Dated: December 31, 2009
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National Arbitration Forum