Imprezzio, Inc. v. Churchmanor Estates Plc / Na Na
Claim Number: FA1208001459425
Complainant is Imprezzio, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Christopher G. Varallo of Witherspoon Kelley, PS, Washington, USA. Respondent is Churchmanor Estates Plc / Na Na (“Respondent”), England.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <omnipark.com>, registered with Register.com.
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.
James A. Carmody, Esq., as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on August 23, 2012; the National Arbitration Forum received payment on August 23, 2012.
On August 28, 2012, Register.com confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <omnipark.com> domain name ise registered with Register.com and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Register.com has verified that Respondent is bound by the Register.com 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 August 28, 2012, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of September 17, 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@omnipark.com. Also on August 28, 2012, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail 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.
The National Arbitration Forum received correspondence from the Respondent, which did not constitute a Response under the Policy and transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On September 21, 2012, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed James A. Carmody, Esq., as Panelist.
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.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
Respondent’s <omnipark.com> domain name, the domain name at issue, is confusingly similar to Complainant’s OMNI PARK mark.
Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name at issue.
Respondent registered and used the domain name at issue in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response but did submit email to the Forum, which the Panel has determined to be a statement of nonuse of the domain name at issue and a consent to transfer to the Complainant.
Respondent’s correspondence with the Forum clearly indicates that Respondent did not know it was the registered owner of <omnipark.com> and consents to transfer of the domain name to Complainant. As a result, the Panel finds that in a circumstance such as this, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain name but instead agrees to transfer the domain name in question to Complainant, the Panel will forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the domain name at issue. See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the 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 or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (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.”).
The Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <omnipark.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
James A. Carmody, Esq., Panelist
Dated: September 25, 2012
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page