Google Inc. v. Erliani
Claim Number: FA1106001395825
Complainant is Google Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Kiran K. Belur of Fenwick & West, LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Erliani (“Respondent”), Indonesia.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <googlefibertothehome.com>, registered with Dynadot.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially, and, to the best of his knowledge, has no conflict of interests in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
Terry F. Peppard as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on June 27, 2011; the National Arbitration Forum received payment on June 27, 2011.
On June 28, 2011, Dynadot confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <googlefibertothehome.com> domain name is registered with Dynadot and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Dynadot has verified that Respondent is bound by the Dynadot registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On June 29, 2011, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of July 19, 2011 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@googlefibertothehome.com. Also on June 29, 2011, 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 compliant response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On July 25, 2011, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Terry F. Peppard as sole Panelist in this proceeding.
Respondent has not submitted in this proceeding a response to the Complaint in compliance with the requirements of the Policy or the associated Rules. However, Respondent has communicated with the National Arbitration Forum via e-mail message, and the pertinent contents of that communication will be considered in determining the appropriate disposition of the Complaint.
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" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. 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 a compliant response from Respondent.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
Complainant markets, under the GOOGLE service mark, an Internet search engine with a large collection of searchable documents, advanced search technology and various search tools.
Complainant owns trademark registrations for the GOOGLE service mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), including Reg. No. 3,570,103, registered February 3, 2009.
Respondent registered the <googlefibertothehome.com> domain name on March 15, 2010.
The disputed domain name resolves to a website featuring content unrelated to the business of Complainant.
Respondent’s <googlefibertothehome.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s GOOGLE mark.
Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name.
Respondent is not authorized or licensed to use any of Complainant’s marks.
Respondent does not have any rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name <googlefibertothehome.com>.
Respondent registered and uses the <googlefibertothehome.com> domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a compliant Response in this proceeding. However, in an e-mail communication addressed to the National Arbitration forum, Respondent has recited, in pertinent part, as follows:
I want to let go this domain and I don’t want to have any confrontation to Google.
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that, in the ordinary course, Complainant must prove each of the following to obtain from a Panel an order that a domain name be transferred:
i. the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights;
ii. Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
iii. the domain name has been registered and is being used by Respondent in bad faith.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, 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.”
Further, Policy ¶ 3(a) provides for the transfer of a domain name registration upon the written instructions of the parties to a UDRP proceeding without the need for otherwise required findings and conclusions (see, for example, Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat. Ar. Forum Jan. 13, 2004; see also Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jun. 24, 2005)).
DECISION
Respondent’s does not contest the material allegations of the Complaint, and, in particular it does not contest Complainant’s request that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant, but states a willingness that the subject domain name be transferred to Complainant. Thus the parties have effectively agreed in writing to a transfer of the subject domain name from Respondent to Complainant without the need for further proceedings.
It is therefore Ordered that the <googlefibertothehome.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED forthwith from Respondent to Complainant.
Terry F. Peppard, Panelist
Dated: July 26, 2011
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page