HOCHTIEF Aktiengesellschaft v. Benoit Menetrieux et al.
Claim Number: FA1407001572632
Complainant: HOCHTIEF Aktiengesellschaft of Essen, Germany.
Complainant Representative: Beetz&Partner Patentanwaelte of Muenchen, Germany.
Respondent: Benoit Menetrieux of Paris, France.
Respondent Representative: unrepresented.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Wild Corner, LLC; Wild Way, LLC
Registrars: Key-Systems, LLC
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
Debrett Gordon Lyons, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: July 31, 2014
Commencement: July 31, 2014
Default Date: August 15, 2014
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the National Arbitration Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure, Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules").
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant holds national and international trademark registrations for HOCHTIEF.
The trademark is currently in use.
The trademark is well known in the relevant industry.
There is no reason to think that Respondent has any right to use or register the domain names.
Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
The Examiner finds clear and convincing evidence that Complainant has registered national rights in the trademark (word mark) which is in use.
The Examiner finds that the registered domain names are confusingly similar to the trademark owned by Complainant.
The Examiner finds clear and convincing evidence that the Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain names.
The Examiner finds clear and convincing evidence that the domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith (under the principle of “passive holding”).
After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that
Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:
Debrett Gordon Lyons, Examiner
Dated: August 19, 2014
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page