National Arbitration Forum




Bond Fletcher, Chief Executive Officer c/o Typehaus, Inc. v. Brian Kemmenoe

Claim Number: FA1003001316357



Complainant is Bond Fletcher, Chief Executive Officer c/o Typehaus, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by David L. Romero, California, USA.  Respondent is Brian Kemmenoe (“Respondent”), United Kingdom.



The domain name at issue is <>, registered with Dotster.



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.


Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.



Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on March 30.


On April 1, 2010, Dotster confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <> domain name is registered with Dotster and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  Dotster has verified that Respondent is bound by the Dotster 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 April 9, 2010, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of April 29, 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  Also on April 9, 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.


A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on April 29, 2010.


On May 7, 2010, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury as Panelist.



Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant. Without admission of contravention of the Policy, Respondent consents to such transfer.



A. Complainant

Complainant contends that the domain name <> is identical to Complainant’s U.S. federally registered trademark CHECKJET, registered on September 30, 2008, Reg. No. 3,509,303.  The domain name was registered on March 3, 2007 and renewed on March 3, 2010, shortly after Complainant had put Respondent on notice of its trademark rights. Complainant says Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, which was registered and is being used in bad faith.


In particular, Complainant says the renewal of the registration of the domain name, after Respondent was put on notice of Complainant’s trademark rights, amounted to bad faith registration.


B. Respondent

Respondent accepts that the domain name and the trademark are identical but denies Complainant’s other assertions. In particular, Respondent notes that Complainant’s mark did not exist when he registered the domain name.



The Panel notes that the domain name was registered before Complainant acquired any trademark rights and finds that there are no circumstances to indicate that Respondent could have had Complainant or its mark in mind when he registered the domain name in March, 2007.


But for Respondent’s consent to the transfer of the domain name to Complainant, this case would have presented an opportunity to consider the careful reasoning in Eastman Sporto Group LLC v. Jim and Kenny, WIPO Case No. D2009-1688, which questions whether it is appropriate to continue to follow early Panel decisions that do not accept renewal as registration for the purposes of the Policy.



Since Respondent consents to transfer the <> domain name to Complainant, the Panel will forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order transfer of the domain name.  See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 9, 2003); Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat Arb. Forum Jan. 13, 2004) and Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 24, 2005).



By consent, and without making any findings adverse to Respondent, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.


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




Alan L. Limbury, Panelist
Dated: May 12, 2010



Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.


Click Here to return to our Home Page


National Arbitration Forum