State Farm Mutual Automobile
Insurance Company v. Citywidetowing c/o Naseer Quadeer
Claim Number: FA1002001306293
PARTIES
Complainant is State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Company (“Complainant”), represented
by Debra J. Monke, of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <statefarmtowings.com>, registered
with Godaddy.com,
Inc.
PANEL
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.
Tyrus R. Atkinson, Jr., as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum
electronically on February 3, 2010. With its Complaint, Complainant also chose to
proceed entirely electronically under the new Rules for Uniform Domain Name
Dispute Resolution Policy (“Rules”) and the new Forum’s Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (“Supplemental Rules”) by
submitted an “opt-in” form available on the Forum’s website.
On February 4, 2010, Godaddy.com, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the
National Arbitration Forum that the <statefarmtowings.com> domain name is
registered with Godaddy.com, Inc. and
that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Godaddy.com,
Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Godaddy.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 February 5, 2010, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes,
including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 25,
2010 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to
all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical,
administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@statefarmtowings.com by
e-mail. Also on February 5, 2010, the
Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the email addresses
served and the deadline for a Response, was
transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed
on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
On February 25, 2010 Respondent submitted an electronic copy of its
Response. The Response was found to be
deficient as Respondent did not send in a hard-copy Response as required by
ICANN Rule 5. Respondent did not
indicate assent to participate in an electronic process; therefore Respondent’s
submission was required to be sent in hard copy per the version of the UDRP
Rule 5 currently in effect.
The Response, though deficient, constituted a consent
to transfer the disputed domain name from Respondent to Complainant. The Panel will consider the consent to transfer
in this proceeding.
On March 5, 2010, pursuant to Complainant’s
request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National
Arbitration Forum appointed Tyrus R. Atkinson, Jr., as Panelist.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from
Respondent to Complainant.
PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
State Farm is a nationally known company that has been doing business
under the name “State Farm” since 1930.
State Farm engages in business in both the insurance and the financial
services industry. State Farm first
began using the “State Farm” trademark in 1930 and registered it with United
States Patent and Trademark Office on June 11, 1996. In January of 2010 it was brought to State
Farm’s attention that Respondent had registered Complainant’s trademark “State
Farm” as part of the domain name, “statefarmtowings.com”. The domain name re-directs users to
citywidetowingsseattle.com, a website for the company, Citywide Towing
in
On January 13, 2010, a cease and desist letter was sent from
Complainant to Respondent. Further
correspondence and conversations were exchanged between the parties resulting
in the filing of this proceeding.
Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed
domain name and has acted in bad faith in registering and using the domain
name.
B. Respondent
Respondent’s attorney submitted an e-mail to the Forum stating, in
part, that notwithstanding any defenses, Respondent stipulates that the remedy
of transfer of the domain name to State Farm should be granted.
FINDINGS
1.
Respondent’s
stipulation to transfer the disputed domain name from Respondent to Complainant
permits a summary disposal in this proceeding without the formal analysis
generally required under the Policy and Rules.
DISCUSSION
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.”
Respondent consents to transfer the <statefarmtowings.com> domain
name to Complainant. However, after the
initiation of this proceeding, Godaddy.com, Inc. placed a hold on Respondent’s
account and therefore Respondent cannot transfer the domain name while this
proceeding is still pending. In a case
of this nature, where Respondent has not contested transfer and has stipulated
that the transfer be made by this Panel, the Panel is authorized to forego the
traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the <statefarmtowings.com> domain
name. See Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH v. Modern Ltd,-Cayman Web Dev., FA
133625 (Nat. Arb Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration
where respondent stipulated to the transfer); See also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v.
Vertical Axis Inc. FA 212653 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this
case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the
Complainant…Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the
Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request,
and it has no mandate to make findings of fact of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”) See
also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475101 (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.”).
DECISION
Respondent having stipulated to the transfer
of the domain name and the stipulation being
permissible under ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that
relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <statefarmtowings.com> domain name be
TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Tyrus R. Atkinson, Jr., Panelist
Dated: March 19, 2010
Click Here to return
to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click
Here to return to our Home Page
National
Arbitration Forum