national arbitration forum

 

DECISION

 

REDCATS USA, L.P. v. Alichec Inc. c/o Brett Alichec a/k/a Argosweb Corp c/o Oleg Techino a/k/a Oleg Techino a/k/a Balram Brahmin c/o Balram Brahmin a/k/a Belroots Pty Ltd c/o Luis de Carvalho a/k/a Chin-Hui Wu c/o Chin-Hui Wu a/k/a Crystal Image Pty Ltd c/o Antonio Marques a/k/a David Ghou c/o David Ghou a/k/a Denesh Kumar c/o Denesh Kumar a/k/a Denholm Borg c/o Denholm Borg a/k/a Elarson & Associates Pty Ltd c/o Eric Larson c/o Domain Administrator a/k/a Lidnick Webcorp Inc c/o Lidnick Webcorp a/k/a Liquid SEO Limited c/o Julian Greenberg a/k/a Loshedina Inc c/o Xi Na a/k/a Luchichang Pty Ltd c/o Luchichang Luchichang a/k/a Marcelos Vainez c/o Marcelos Vainez a/k/a Netmilo c/o Stoyan Bagdanov a/k/a Orel Hlasek LLC c/o Orel Hlasek a/k/a Vlad Obchikov c/o Vlad Obchikov a/k/a Volchar Pty Ltd c/o Domain Administrator a/k/a Web Pescados LLC c/o Augustine Rivera a/k/a Webatopia Marketing Limited c/o Michael Short a/k/a Alex Ovchekin a/k/a WuWeb Pty Ltd c/o Michael Chung Wu a/k/a ZincFusion Limited c/o Vivian Cox

Claim Number: FA1007001337660

 

PARTIES

Complainant is REDCATS USA, L.P. (“Complainant”), represented by CitizenHawk, Inc., California, USA.  Respondent is REDCATS USA, L.P. v. Alichec Inc. c/o Brett Alichec a/k/a Argosweb Corp c/o Oleg Techino a/k/a Oleg Techino a/k/a Balram Brahmin c/o Balram Brahmin a/k/a Belroots Pty Ltd c/o Luis de Carvalho a/k/a Chin-Hui Wu c/o Chin-Hui Wu a/k/a Crystal Image Pty Ltd c/o Antonio Marques a/k/a David Ghou c/o David Ghou a/k/a Denesh Kumar c/o Denesh Kumar a/k/a Denholm Borg c/o Denholm Borg a/k/a Elarson & Associates Pty Ltd c/o Eric Larson c/o Domain Administrator a/k/a Lidnick Webcorp Inc c/o Lidnick Webcorp a/k/a Liquid SEO Limited c/o Julian Greenberg a/k/a Loshedina Inc c/o Xi Na a/k/a Luchichang Pty Ltd c/o Luchichang Luchichang a/k/a Marcelos Vainez c/o Marcelos Vainez a/k/a Netmilo c/o Stoyan Bagdanov a/k/a Orel Hlasek LLC c/o Orel Hlasek a/k/a Vlad Obchikov c/o Vlad Obchikov a/k/a Volchar Pty Ltd c/o Domain Administrator a/k/a Web Pescados LLC c/o Augustine Rivera a/k/a Webatopia Marketing Limited c/o Michael Short a/k/a Alex Ovchekin a/k/a WuWeb Pty Ltd c/o Michael Chung Wu a/k/a ZincFusion Limited c/o Vivian Cox (“Respondent”).

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES

The domain names at issue are <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, <kingsizedireect.com>, <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, <oramans.com>, <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, <womanwjthin.com>, <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, Inc.

 

PANEL

The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and that to the best of her knowledge she has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically July 27, 2010.

 

On July 30, 2010, GoDaddy.com, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the  <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, <kingsizedireect.com>, <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, <oramans.com>, <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, <womanwjthin.com>, <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com> domain names are registered with GoDaddy.com, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  GoDaddy.com, Inc. verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, Inc. registration agreement and thereby has agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

 

On August 5, 2010, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of August 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@kihgsizedirect.com, postmaster@kkingsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingaizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizediirect.com, postmaster@kiingsizedirect.com, postmaster@kinfsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedirext.com, postmaster@jingsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizediredt.com, postmaster@kingiszedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizsdirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedirectt.com, postmaster@kingsozedirect.com, postmaster@kingesizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsiizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizzedirect.com, postmaster@kingxizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedorect.com, postmaster@kingsizeidrect.com, postmaster@kinbsizedirect.com, postmaster@kinggsizedirect.com, postmaster@kinhsizedirect.com, postmaster@kinngsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizeedirect.com, postmaster@kingzizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizidirect.com, postmaster@kingsziedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizediretc.com, postmaster@kingsizedirsct.com, postmaster@kignsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsiaedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedirict.com, postmaster@kingsizedirecct.com, postmaster@kingsuzedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedirrct.com, postmaster@kingsizediract.com, postmaster@kingsizedirecr.com, postmaster@kongsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedirecet.com, postmaster@lingsizedirect.com, postmaster@ingsizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsezedirect.com, postmaster@kingsiezdirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedurect.com, postmaster@kingdizedirect.com, postmaster@kingsizedireect.com, postmaster@roamas.com, postmaster@roamahs.com, postmaster@roanans.com, postmaster@eoamans.com, postmaster@roamasn.com, postmaster@riamans.com, postmaster@roamane.com, postmaster@foamans.com, postmaster@roamnas.com, postmaster@roaamns.com, postmaster@rlamans.com, postmaster@roamanx.com, postmaster@roamanc.com, postmaster@rooamans.com, postmaster@roaans.com, postmaster@roajans.com, postmaster@roamanz.com, postmaster@r0amans.com, postmaster@toamans.com, postmaster@oramans.com, postmaster@womajwithin.com, postmaster@womanwihin.com, postmaster@womanwitjin.com, postmaster@wlmanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwkthin.com, postmaster@wommanwithin.com, postmaster@eomanwithin.com, postmaster@womanw8thin.com, postmaster@womanwithij.com, postmaster@woman2ithin.com, postmaster@womanwithjn.com, postmaster@womawnithin.com, postmaster@qomanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwihtin.com, postmaster@womanwithkn.com, postmaster@womanwuithin.com, postmaster@woman3ithin.com, postmaster@womaniwthin.com, postmaster@womanwith8n.com, postmaster@w0manwithin.com, postmaster@womanwighin.com, postmaster@womanwwithin.com, postmaster@owmanwithin.com, postmaster@womansithin.com, postmaster@womanwitnin.com, postmaster@womanqithin.com, postmaster@womanwitain.com, postmaster@womnawithin.com, postmaster@wmoanwithin.com, postmaster@womanaithin.com, postmaster@womanwitbin.com, postmaster@aomanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwith9n.com, postmaster@womanwtihin.com, postmaster@wkmanwithin.com, postmaster@womaanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwythin.com, postmaster@womanwifhin.com, postmaster@womanwothin.com, postmaster@wuomanwithin.com, postmaster@wojanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwidhin.com, postmaster@womanwithinn.com, postmaster@wamanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwi5hin.com, postmaster@womanwithhin.com, postmaster@3omanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwithih.com, postmaster@womanwithni.com, postmaster@womanwuthin.com, postmaster@womanwirhin.com, postmaster@womanwitthin.com, postmaster@woumanwithin.com, postmaster@woemanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwithiin.com, postmaster@womanwiyhin.com, postmaster@womahwithin.com, postmaster@womanwituin.com, postmaster@womanwthin.com, postmaster@omanwithin.com, postmaster@wokanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwitgin.com, postmaster@wmanwithin.com, postmaster@womabwithin.com, postmaster@womanwityin.com, postmaster@womanw9thin.com, postmaster@wwomanwithin.com, postmaster@w9manwithin.com, postmaster@womannwithin.com, postmaster@womanwethin.com, postmaster@2omanwithin.com, postmaster@womanwithyn.com, postmaster@womanwitihn.com, postmaster@womanwjthin.com, postmaster@hrylanehome.com, postmaster@brrylanehome.com, postmaster@brylaneh0me.com, postmaster@brylanehoms.com, postmaster@brylanehame.com, postmaster@berylanehome.com, postmaster@brylanihome.com, postmaster@brylanebome.com, postmaster@brylanahome.com, postmaster@brylanehoje.com, postmaster@prylanehome.com, postmaster@bfylanehome.com, postmaster@grylanehome.com, postmaster@brhlanehome.com, postmaster@brylanehoma.com, postmaster@b5ylanehome.com, postmaster@brylahehome.com, postmaster@brglanehome.com, postmaster@brypanehome.com, postmaster@bryilanehome.com, postmaster@bryoanehome.com, postmaster@erylanehome.com, and postmaster@brylanehomi.com by e-mail.  Also on August 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.

 

Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On September 9, 2010, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson to sit as Panelist.

 

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the National Arbitration Forum 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" through submission of a Written Notice, as defined in Rule 1.  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.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A.  Complainant makes the following assertions:

 

1.      The domain names that Respondent registered: <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, and <kingsizedireect.com> are confusingly similar to Complainant’s KING SIZE DIRECT mark.

 

Additional domain names that Respondent registered: <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, and <oramans.com> are confusingly similar to Complainant’s ROAMAN’S mark.

 

Further domain names that Respondent registered: <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, and <womanwjthin.com> are confusingly similar to Complainant’s THE WOMAN WITHIN mark.

 

Lastly, these domain names that Respondent registered: <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com> are confusingly similar to Complainant’s BRYLANE HOME mark.

 

2.      Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the following domain names: <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, <kingsizedireect.com>, <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, <oramans.com>, <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, <womanwjthin.com>, <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com>.

 

3.      Respondent registered and used the following domain names in bad faith:  <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, <kingsizedireect.com>, <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, <oramans.com>, <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, <womanwjthin.com>, <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com>.

 

B.  Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant, REDCATS USA, L.P., offers web-driven home shopping.  Complainant holds trademark registrations with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for the following marks:

 

·        THE WOMAN WITHIN (e.g., Reg. No. 1,617,731 issued on October 16, 1990);

·        ROAMAN’S (e.g., Reg. No. 2,654,195 issued on November 26, 2002);

·        KING SIZE DIRECT (e.g., Reg. No. 2,751,981 issued on August 19, 2003);

·        BRYLANE HOME (e.g., Reg. No. 2,588,396 issued on July 2, 2002).

 

Respondent registered the disputed domain names on or after June 23, 2004.

 

DISCUSSION

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."

 

Given 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 will draw such inferences as the Panel 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 Complainant to 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.

 

Preliminary Issue: Multiple Respondents

 

In the instant proceeding, Complainant has alleged that the entities that control the domain names at issue are effectively controlled by the same person and/or entity, which is operating under several aliases.  Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”) provides that a “complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder.”

 

Complainant contends that although it appears that different registrants have registered the disputed domain names, they are in fact registered to aliases of a single entity.  Complainant provides a list of commonalities that occur across all of the registrations, which, when taken together, suggest a single entity:

 

1.      All of the names are registered using the same Registrar; GoDaddy.com.

2.      Most of the domain names are registered on a single date.

3.      The registering entity custom tailors the traffic by mark in order to maximize the monetary gains from the domain names.

4.      The mechanisms used to forward the traffic and profit from the domain names use the same patterns (i.e. domain names using pay-per-click pages all route through the same redirects).

5.      All of the domain names are typographical misspellings of Complainant’s ROAMAN’S, KING SIZE DIRECT, THE WOMAN WITHIN, and BRYLANE HOME marks.

 

In addition, Complainant explains that all affiliate marketing programs track and credit revenue generated by a sale or lead via an account ID.  Complainant alleges that all of the disputed domain name registrants use a common publisher ID.  Thus, Complainant argues that the “money trail” points to a single entity as the registrant of the disputed domain names.  The Panel finds that Complainant presented sufficient evidence that the disputed domain names are controlled by the same entity and thus this Panel chooses to proceed with the instant proceedings to a decision on the merits.

 

Identical to and/or Confusingly Similar

 

Complainant asserts that it has rights in the ROAMAN’S, KING SIZE DIRECT, WOMAN WITHIN, and BRYLANE HOME marks through its registrations of the marks with the USPTO.  The Panel finds that these trademark registrations sufficiently prove Complainant’s rights in the ROAMAN’S, KING SIZE DIRECT, WOMAN WITHIN, and BRYLANE HOME marks pursuant to a Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis.  See Expedia, Inc. v. Tan, FA 991075 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 29, 2007) (“As the [complainant’s] mark is registered with the USPTO, [the] complainant has met the requirements of Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).”); see also Intel Corp. v. Macare, FA 660685 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 26, 2006) (finding that the complainant had established rights in the PENTIUM, CENTRINO and INTEL INSIDE marks by registering the marks with the USPTO).  Furthermore, the Panel finds Complainant need not hold trademark registrations with the trademark authority in the country in which Respondent resides or operates.  See Koninklijke KPN N.V. v. Telepathy Inc., D2001-0217 (WIPO May 7, 2001) (finding that the Policy does not require that the mark be registered in the country in which the respondent operates; therefore it is sufficient that the complainant can demonstrate a mark in some jurisdiction).

 

Complainant urges that Respondent’s domain names <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, and <kingsizedireect.com> are confusingly similar to its KING SIZE DIRECT mark.  Complainant claims that deleting the spaces between the words in a mark does not negate a finding of confusingly similar.  In addition, Complainant asserts that each of the disputed domain names contains a common misspelling of Complainant’s KING SIZE DIRECT mark.  For example, in the <kihgsizedirect.com> domain name, Respondent replaces the letter “n” in the first word of Complainant’s mark with the letter “h.”  Likewise, Complainant alleges that in the <kingsiezdirect.com> domain name, Respondent creates a misspelling of its mark by transposing the letter “z” with the letter “e” in the second word of its mark.  Finally, Complainant notes that the addition of the generic top-level domain (“gTLD”) “.com” does not sufficiently distinguish a domain name from a mark. 

 

The Panel agrees with Complainant that misspelling of a mark, omitting spaces between the words in a mark, and attaching a gTLD to a mark do not render a domain name distinct from a mark.  See Gurney’s Inn Resort & Spa Ltd. v. Whitney, FA 140656 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 19, 2003) (“Punctuation and spaces between words are not significant in determining the similarity of a domain name and a mark because punctuation and spaces are not reproducible in a domain name.”); see also Belkin Components v. Gallant, FA 97075 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 29, 2001) (finding the <belken.com> domain name confusingly similar to the complainant's BELKIN mark because the name merely replaced the letter “i” in the complainant's mark with the letter “e”); see also Google Inc. v. Jon G., FA 106084 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 26, 2002) (finding <googel.com> to be confusingly similar to the complainant’s GOOGLE mark and noting that “[t]he transposition of two letters does not create a distinct mark capable of overcoming a claim of confusing similarity, as the result reflects a very probable typographical error”); see also Reese v. Morgan, FA 917029 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 5, 2007) (finding that the mere addition of the generic top-level domain “.com” is insufficient to differentiate a disputed domain name from a mark).  Therefore, the Panel finds that these disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s KING SIZE DIRECT mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

In addition, Complainant urges that Respondent’s <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, and <oramans.com> domain names are confusingly similar to its ROAMAN’S mark.  Complainant argues that deleting the apostrophe from a mark and attaching the gTLD “.com” to a mark do not distinguish the confusingly similar domain names under a Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis.  Again, Complainant claims that replacing letters and transposing letters in a mark do not distinguish a domain name from a mark.  Furthermore, Complainant asserts that removing one letter from a mark or adding one letter to a mark does not distinguish a domain name from a mark.  For example, Respondent merely deletes the “m” from Complainant’s mark in the <roaans.com> domain name.  Conversely, Respondent adds an extra letter “o” to its mark in the <rooamans.com> domain name.  Additionally, Complainant contends that replacing the letter “o” in its mark with the number “0” in the <r0amans.com> domain name does not sufficiently distinguish this domain name from Complainant’s ROAMAN’S mark. 

 

Based on precedent, the Panel agrees that addition of an extra letter, the omission of a letter, transposing letters in a mark, omitting an apostrophe from a mark, and attaching a gTLD do not render a domain name distinct from another’s mark.  See LOreal USA Creative Inc v. Syncopate.com – Smart Names for Startups, FA 203944 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 8, 2003) (finding that the omission of an apostrophe did not significantly distinguish the domain name from the mark); see also Dow Jones & Co., Inc. v. Powerclick, Inc., supra; Pfizer Inc. v. BargainName.com, D2005-0299 (WIPO Apr. 28, 2005) (holding that the <pfzer.com> domain name was confusingly similar to the complainant’s PFIZER mark, as the respondent simply omitted the letter “i”); see also Oxygen Media, LLC v. Primary Source, D2000-0362 (WIPO June 19, 2000) (finding that the domain name <0xygen.com>, with zero in place of letter “O,” “appears calculated to trade on Complainant’s name by exploiting likely mistake by users when entering the url address”); see also Microsoft Corp. v. Domain Registration Philippines, FA 877979 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 20, 2007) (finding the respondent’s <microssoft.com> domain name to be confusingly similar to the complainant’s MICROSOFT mark because they differ by only one letter, and “such a small alteration is insufficient to avoid a finding of confusing similarity under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i)”; see also Belkin Components v. Gallant, supra; see also Google Inc. v. Jon G., supra; see also Reese v. Morgan, supra.  Therefore, this Panel finds that the above disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s ROAMAN’S mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

Complainant also contends that Respondent’s <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, and <womanwjthin.com> domain names are confusingly similar to its THE WOMAN WITHIN mark.   Complainant once again asserts that the omission of spaces between the words in its mark and the affixation of the gTLD “.com” are irrelevant to the Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis.  Complainant also repeats the claim that adding a letter, removing a letter, and transposing letters do not render a domain name distinct from a mark.  Finally, Complainant claims deleting the article “the” does not influence the confusingly similar analysis. 

 

The Panel agrees with Complainant’s assertions.  See Gurney’s Inn Resort & Spa Ltd. v. Whitney, supra; see also Dow Jones & Co., Inc. v. Powerclick, Inc., supra; see also Pfizer Inc. v. BargainName.com, supra; see also Oxygen Media, supra; see also Microsoft Corp. v. Domain Registration Philippines, supra; see also Belkin Components v. Gallant, supra; see also Google Inc. v. Jon G., supra; see also Reese v. Morgan, supra; see also Antoun v. Truth Squad, FA 114766 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 21, 2002) (stating that the article "the" is "often added only for grammatical purposes, and may be superfluous to the name itself").  Therefore, the Panel finds these disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s THE WOMAN WITHIN mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

Lastly, Complainant alleges that Respondent’s <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com> domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s BRYLANE HOME mark.  As set out previously, Complainant contends that omitting the spaces between the words in a mark and then either adding a letter, removing a letter, or transposing letters do not negate a finding of confusingly similar.  Complainant reiterates that the addition of the gTLD “.com” is irrelevant to the Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis.   

 

Once again, the Panel agrees with Complainant’s assertions.  See Gurney’s Inn Resort & Spa Ltd. v. Whitney, supra; see also Dow Jones & Co., Inc. v. Powerclick, Inc., supra; see also Pfizer Inc. v. BargainName.com, supra; see also Oxygen Media, LLC v. Primary Source, supra; see also Microsoft Corp. v. Domain Registration Philippines, supra; see also Belkin Components v. Gallant, supra; see also Google Inc. v. Jon G., supra; see also Reese v. Morgan, supra. Therefore, the Panel finds that these disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s BRYLANE HOME mark pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

The Panel finds that the disputed domain names are all confusingly similar to Complainant’s various marks; Complainant satisfied the elements of ICANN Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

Rights to or Legitimate Interests

 

According to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), after showing that it has rights, Complainant must then make a prima facie showing that Respondent has no such rights to and legitimate interests in the disputed domain names.  The burden of proof to show rights then shifts to Respondent to prove it has rights to or legitimate interests in the domain names.  The Panel may view Respondent’s failure to submit a Response as evidence that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests.  See Intel Corp. v. Macare, FA 660685 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 26, 2006) (finding that the “complainant must first make a prima facie case that [the] respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain names under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), and then the burden shifts to [the] respondent to show it does have rights or legitimate interests.”); see also Am. Express Co. v. Fang Suhendro, FA 129120 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 30, 2002) (“[B]ased on Respondent's failure to respond, it is presumed that Respondent lacks all rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.”).  Although Respondent failed to respond, the Panel still examines the record to determine if the evidence suggests that Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c).

 

The WHOIS information does not indicate that Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain names.  Furthermore, Complainant claims it has not given Respondent permission to use its marks in a domain name.  Without evidence to the contrary, the Panel finds that the WHOIS information combined with Complainant’s assertions indicate that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).  See Tercent Inc. v. Lee Yi, FA 139720 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 10, 2003) (stating “nothing in Respondent’s WHOIS information implies that Respondent is ‘commonly known by’ the disputed domain name” as one factor in determining that Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) does not apply); see also Braun Corp. v. Loney, FA 699652 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 7, 2006) (concluding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain names where the WHOIS information, as well as all other information in the record, gave no indication that the respondent was commonly known by the disputed domain names, and the complainant had not authorized the respondent to register a domain name containing its registered mark).

 

Complainant further claims that Respondent is using some or all of the disputed domain names to redirect Internet users to a website that features links to third-party websites, some of which directly compete with Complainant’s business.  Complainant also claims that some of the disputed domain names redirect Internet users to Complainant’s official website through Complainant’s affiliate program.   Moreover, Complainant contends that Respondent profits from this use of the disputed domain names through the receipt of pay-per-click and affiliate fees.  Based on evidence in the record, the Panel finds that Respondent is using the confusingly similar domain names to profit from pay-per-click and affiliate fees and that this use does not constitute a bona fide offering of goods or service under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).  See TM Acquisition Corp. v. Sign Guards, FA 132439 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 31, 2002) (finding that the respondent’s diversionary use of the complainant’s marks to send Internet users to a website which displayed a series of links, some of which linked to the complainant’s competitors, was not a bona fide offering of goods or services); see also Fox News Network, LLC v. Reid, D2002-1085 (WIPO Feb. 18, 2003) (finding that the respondent’s use of the disputed domain name to generate revenue via advertisement and affiliate fees is not a bona fide offering of good or services).

 

The Panel also concludes that Respondent’s use of domain names that are common misspellings of Complainant’s marks constitutes typosquatting, which may be taken as further evidence that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests pursuant to Policy ¶ 4 (a)(ii).  See Microsoft Corp. v. Domain Registration Philippines, FA 877979 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 20, 2007) (concluding that by registering the <microssoft.com> domain name, the respondent had “engaged in typosquatting, which provides additional evidence that [the] respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).”); see also LTD Commodities LLC v. Party Night, Inc., FA 165155 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 14, 2003) (finding that the <ltdcommadities.com>, <ltdcommmodities.com>, and <ltdcommodaties.com> domain names were intentional misspellings of Complainant's LTD COMMODITIES mark and this “‘typosquatting’ is evidence that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names”).

 

The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names; Complainant satisfied the elements of ICANN Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

 

The Panel finds that some of the disputed domain names redirect Internet users seeking Complainant’s businesses to websites that display links to Complainant’s competitors.  Therefore, the Panel concludes that Respondent’s disputed domain names disrupt Complainant’s business and that this use supports findings that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain names in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii).  See Tesco Pers. Fin. Ltd. v. Domain Mgmt. Servs., FA 877982 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 13, 2007) (concluding that the use of a confusingly similar domain name to attract Internet users to a directory website containing commercial links to the websites of a complainant’s competitors represents bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii)); see also Persohn v. Lim, FA 874447 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 19, 2007) (finding bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii) where a respondent used the disputed domain name to operate a commercial search engine with links to the complainant’s competitors).

 

Complainant asserts that Respondent uses confusingly similar domain names in order to profit from pay-per-click and affiliate fees.  The Panel concurs with Complainant’s contention and finds that Respondent intentionally attempts to attract, for its own commercial gain, Internet users to its websites, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s marks as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of its websites.  Therefore, the Panel finds that such conduct constitutes registration and use in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).  See T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. utahhealth, FA 697821 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 7, 2006) (holding that the registration and use of a domain name confusingly similar to a complainant’s mark to direct Internet traffic to a commercial “links page” in order to profit from click-through fees or other revenue sources constitutes bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv)); see also Deluxe Corp. v. Dallas Internet, FA 105216 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 10, 2002) (finding the respondent registered and used the <deluxeform.com> domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) by redirecting its users to the complainant’s <deluxeforms.com> domain name, thus receiving a commission from the complainant through its affiliate program).

 

Finally, Respondent has engaged in typosquatting through its used of the disputed domain names, which the Panel finds on its race constitutes bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).  See The Vanguard Group, Inc. v. IQ Mgmt. Corp., FA 328127 (Nat. Arb. Forum Oct. 28, 2004) (“By engaging in typosquatting, [r]espondent has registered and used the <vangard.com> domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).”); see also Nat’l Ass’n of Prof’l Baseball League, Inc. v. Zuccarini, D2002-1011 (WIPO Jan. 21, 2003) (“Typosquatting … is the intentional misspelling of words with [the] intent to intercept and siphon off traffic from its intended destination, by preying on Internauts who make common typing errors.  Typosquatting is inherently parasitic and of itself evidence of bad faith.”).

 

The Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain names in bad faith; Complainant satisfied the elements of ICANN Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).

 

DECISION

Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <kihgsizedirect.com>, <kkingsizedirect.com>, <kingaizedirect.com>, <kingsizediirect.com>, <kiingsizedirect.com>, <kinfsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirext.com>, <jingsizedirect.com>, <kingsizediredt.com>, <kingiszedirect.com>, <kingsizsdirect.com>, <kingsizedirectt.com>, <kingsozedirect.com>, <kingesizedirect.com>, <kingsiizedirect.com>, <kingsizzedirect.com>, <kingxizedirect.com>, <kingsizedorect.com>, <kingsizeidrect.com>, <kinbsizedirect.com>, <kinggsizedirect.com>, <kinhsizedirect.com>, <kinngsizedirect.com>, <kingsizeedirect.com>, <kingzizedirect.com>, <kingsizidirect.com>, <kingsziedirect.com>, <kingsizediretc.com>, <kingsizedirsct.com>, <kignsizedirect.com>, <kingsiaedirect.com>, <kingsizedirict.com>, <kingsizedirecct.com>, <kingsuzedirect.com>, <kingsizedirrct.com>, <kingsizediract.com>, <kingsizedirecr.com>, <kongsizedirect.com>, <kingsizedirecet.com>, <lingsizedirect.com>, <ingsizedirect.com>, <kingsezedirect.com>, <kingsiezdirect.com>, <kingsizedurect.com>, <kingdizedirect.com>, <kingsizedireect.com>, <roamas.com>, <roamahs.com>, <roanans.com>, <eoamans.com>, <roamasn.com>, <riamans.com>, <roamane.com>, <foamans.com>, <roamnas.com>, <roaamns.com>, <rlamans.com>, <roamanx.com>, <roamanc.com>, <rooamans.com>, <roaans.com>, <roajans.com>, <roamanz.com>, <r0amans.com>, <toamans.com>, <oramans.com>, <womajwithin.com>, <womanwihin.com>, <womanwitjin.com>, <wlmanwithin.com>, <womanwkthin.com>, <wommanwithin.com>, <eomanwithin.com>, <womanw8thin.com>, <womanwithij.com>, <woman2ithin.com>, <womanwithjn.com>, <womawnithin.com>, <qomanwithin.com>,<womanwihtin.com>, <womanwithkn.com>, <womanwuithin.com>, <woman3ithin.com>, <womaniwthin.com>, <womanwith8n.com>, <w0manwithin.com>, <womanwighin.com>, <womanwwithin.com>, <owmanwithin.com>, <womansithin.com>, <womanwitnin.com>, <womanqithin.com>, <womanwitain.com>, <womnawithin.com>, <wmoanwithin.com>, <womanaithin.com>, <womanwitbin.com>, <aomanwithin.com>, <womanwith9n.com>, <womanwtihin.com>, <wkmanwithin.com>, <womaanwithin.com>, <womanwythin.com>, <womanwifhin.com>, <womanwothin.com>, <wuomanwithin.com>, <wojanwithin.com>, <womanwidhin.com>, <womanwithinn.com>, <wamanwithin.com>, <womanwi5hin.com>, <womanwithhin.com>, <3omanwithin.com>, <womanwithih.com>, <womanwithni.com>, <womanwuthin.com>, <womanwirhin.com>, <womanwitthin.com>, <woumanwithin.com>, <woemanwithin.com>, <womanwithiin.com>, <womanwiyhin.com>, <womahwithin.com>, <womanwituin.com>, <womanwthin.com>, <omanwithin.com>, <wokanwithin.com>, <womanwitgin.com>, <wmanwithin.com>, <womabwithin.com>, <womanwityin.com>, <womanw9thin.com>, <wwomanwithin.com>, <w9manwithin.com>, <womannwithin.com>, <womanwethin.com>, <2omanwithin.com>, <womanwithyn.com>, <womanwitihn.com>, <womanwjthin.com>, <hrylanehome.com>, <brrylanehome.com>, <brylaneh0me.com>, <brylanehoms.com>, <brylanehame.com>, <berylanehome.com>, <brylanihome.com>, <brylanebome.com>, <brylanahome.com>, <brylanehoje.com>, <prylanehome.com>, <bfylanehome.com>, <grylanehome.com>, <brhlanehome.com>, <brylanehoma.com>, <b5ylanehome.com>, <brylahehome.com>, <brglanehome.com>, <brypanehome.com>, <bryilanehome.com>, <bryoanehome.com>, <erylanehome.com>, and <brylanehomi.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson, Panelist

Dated: September 23,2010.

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

 

Click Here to return to our Home Page

 

National Arbitration Forum