national arbitration forum

 

DECISION

 

Assurant, Inc. v. Rama Juturu

Claim Number: FA1204001438603

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Assurant, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Theresa Conduah of Alston & Bird LLP, North Carolina, USA.  Respondent is Rama Juturu (“Respondent”), Florida, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <medassurantcloud.com>, registered with 1 & 1 Internet AG.

 

PANEL

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.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electron-ically on April 9, 2012; the National Arbitration Forum received payment on April 10, 2012.

 

On April 12, 2012, 1 & 1 Internet AG confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbi-tration Forum that the <medassurantcloud.com> domain name is registered with 1 & 1 Internet AG and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  1 & 1 Internet AG has verified that Respondent is bound by the 1 & 1 Internet AG 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 April 17, 2012, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of May 7, 2012 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@medassurantcloud.com.  Also on April 17, 2012, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respond-ent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registra-tion 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 May 10, 2012, 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.

 

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 any response from Respondent.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

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

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

 

Complainant markets insurance and financial services under its ASSURANT mark.

 

Complainant owns a registration, on file with the United States Patent and Trade-mark Office (“USPTO”) for its ASSURANT trademark (Reg. No. 2,543,367, regis-tered February 26, 2002).

 

Respondent’s <medassurantcloud.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s ASSURANT mark.

 

Respondent uses the <medassurantcloud.com> domain name to resolve to a website that hosts hyperlinks resolving to third-party websites.

 

Respondent presumably receives click-through fees from the operation of the resolving website.

 

Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name is not in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services nor is it a legitimate non-commercial or fair use.

 

Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.

 

Respondent’s registration and use of the contested domain name is in bad faith. 

 

B. Respondent

 

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding which is in compli-ance with the requirements of the Policy and its accompanying rules.  However, in e-mail communications with the National Arbitration Forum, Respondent has recited that the appropriate party has:

 

decided to release the domain “medassurantcloud.com”. We will be happy to work with 1and1 Internet AG to release the said domain.     

 

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 or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

iii.    the domain name has been registered and is being used 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 accord-ance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable.”

 

Further, Paragraph 14(b) of the Rules provides that, where a party fails to comply with requirements laid on by the Rules, the Panel may draw such inferences from that failure as it considers appropriate.   

 

DECISION

It appears from the record that Respondent does not contest the material alle-gations of the Complaint.  It further appears that Respondent consents to the “release” of the subject domain name to Complainant as prayed for in the Com-plaint, so that the parties have tacitly agreed to the transfer of the subject domain name from Respondent to Complainant without the need for further proceedings.  In the exceptional circumstances here presented, we conclude that no worthwhile purpose would be served by a rendition of findings otherwise customary in pro-ceedings of this kind. 

 

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

 

 

Terry F. Peppard, Panelist

Dated:  May 24, 2012

 

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page