Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v.
Indian Springs Motor
Claim Number: FA0305000157289
Complainant is Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., Torrance, CA (“Complainant”) represented by Bernard R. Gans of Jeffer,
Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP. Respondent is Indian Springs Motor, Ringgold, GA (“Respondent”).
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The
domain names at issue are <glennstoyota.com>
and <usedtoyotalexus.com>
registered with Network Solutions, Inc. and Tucows, Inc., respectively.
The
undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially
and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as
Panelist in this proceeding.
Judge
Harold Kalina (Ret.) as Panelist.
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum")
electronically on May 9, 2003; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint
on May 12, 2003.
On
May 12, 2003, Tucows, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name
<usedtoyotalexus.com> is
registered with Tucows, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of
the name. Tucows, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Tucows,
Inc. registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes
brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute
Resolution Policy (the "Policy").
On
May 14, 2003, Network Solutions, Inc., confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that
the domain name <glennstoyota.com>
is registered with Network Solutions, Inc. and that Respondent is the current
registrant of the name. Network Solutions, Inc. has verified that Respondent is
bound by the Network Solutions, Inc. registration agreement and has thereby
agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance
with the Policy.
On
May 15, 2003, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of
June 4, 2003 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was
transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons
listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing
contacts, and to postmaster@glennstoyota.com and postmaster@usedtoyotalexus.com
by e-mail.
Having
received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and
methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the Forum transmitted
to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On
June 11, 2003, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by
a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Judge Harold Kalina (Ret.) as
Panelist.
Having
reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the
"Panel") finds that the 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."
Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents
submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the 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 names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
1. Respondent’s <glennstoyota.com> and <usedtoyotalexus.com>
domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s TOYOTA and LEXUS marks.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or
legitimate interests in the <glennstoyota.com>
and <usedtoyotalexus.com>
domain names.
3. Respondent registered and used the <glennstoyota.com> and <usedtoyotalexus.com> domain names
in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in
this proceeding.
Complainant is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Toyota Motor Corporation (“TMC”). Complainant
submits that it is the exclusive importer and exclusive licensee of TMC’s
trademarks and service marks, including the TOYOTA and LEXUS marks. Through
this licensing relationship, Complainant holds several trademark registrations
with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for the TOYOTA
mark (Reg. No. 843,138 registered on August 1, 1989) in relation to automobiles
and motor trucks. Complainant holds two trademark registrations with the USPTO
for the LEXUS mark (Reg. No. 1,574,718 registered on January 2, 1990) related
to automobiles.
Complainant
operates websites at <toyota.com> and <lexus.com>, which allow
customers to locate local dealerships and obtain information about the latest
models of Toyota and Lexus vehicles.
Respondent
registered the <glennstoyota.com>
domain name on December 22, 2000. The disputed domain name initially resolved
to a website for Glenn’s Toyota and Indian Springs Motor, although Respondent
is not currently using the domain name. After Complainant sent Respondent a
letter on October 23, 2001 informing Respondent of Complainant’s rights in the
TOYOTA and LEXUS marks, Respondent registered the <usedtoyotalexus.com> domain name on November 28, 2001. The <usedtoyotalexus.com> domain name
is currently the home page for Glenn’s Toyota, which has since adopted the name
“Used Toyota and Lexus” as well as “Indian Springs Motor Co.”
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."
In view of
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
draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of
the Rules.
Paragraph 4(a)
of the Policy requires that Complainant must 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.
Complainant has
established that it has rights in the TOYOTA and LEXUS marks through TMC’s
registration with the USPTO and Complainant’s subsidiary relationship with TMC.
Respondent’s <glennstoyota.com> and <usedtoyotalexus.com> domain
names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s marks because the disputed
domain names appropriate Complainant’s marks and merely add the generic terms
“glenns” and “used” to the beginning of Complainant’s marks. The addition of a
generic term to a famous mark does not sufficiently differentiate the domain
name for purposes of Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) because the mark remains the primary
focus of the domain name. See Sony
Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil, D2000-1409 (WIPO Dec. 9, 2000) (finding that
“[n]either the addition of an ordinary descriptive word . . . nor the suffix
‘.com’ detract from the overall impression of the dominant part of the name in
each case, namely the trademark SONY” and thus Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) is satisfied); see also AXA China Region Ltd. v. KANNET
Ltd., D2000-1377 (WIPO Nov. 29, 2000) (finding that common geographic
qualifiers or generic nouns can rarely be relied upon to differentiate the mark
if the other elements of the domain name comprise a mark or marks in which
another party has rights).
The Panel finds
that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Respondent has
failed to come forward and answer the allegations of the Complainant. Thus, the
Panel may accept all reasonable allegations and inferences in the Complaint as
true. See Do the Hustle, LLC v. Tropic
Web, D2000-0624 (WIPO Aug. 21, 2000) (“Failure of a respondent to come
forward to [contest complainant’s allegations] is tantamount to admitting the
truth of complainant’s assertion in this regard”); see also Charles Jourdan Holding AG v. AAIM, D2000-0403 (WIPO June
27, 2000) (finding it appropriate for the Panel to draw adverse inferences from
Respondent’s failure to reply to the Complaint).
Moreover,
Respondent’s failure to answer the Complaint allows the Panel to presume that
Respondent lacks any rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain
names. See Pavillion Agency, Inc. v.
Greenhouse Agency Ltd., D2000-1221 (WIPO Dec. 4, 2000) (finding that
Respondents’ failure to respond can be construed as an admission that they have
no legitimate interest in the domain names); see also Geocities v. Geociites.com, D2000-0326 (WIPO June 19,
2000) (finding that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the
domain name because the Respondent never submitted a response or provided the
Panel with evidence to suggest otherwise).
Respondent is
currently not using the <glennstoyota.com>
domain name. However, Resopndent is using the <usedtoyotalexus.com> domain name to redirect Internet
traffic to Respondent’s website. The Panel finds that neither demonstrates a
bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a
legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii) because
Respondent is not related to or licensed by Complainant. See Body Shop Int’l PLC v. CPIC NET & Hussain, D2000-1214 (WIPO
Nov. 26, 2000) (finding “that on the evidence provided by the Complainant and
in the absence of any submissions from the Respondents, that the Complainant
has established that (i) the Respondents are not using and have not used, or
are not demonstrating and have not demonstrated, an intent to use the said
domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; (ii)
the Respondents are not and have not been commonly known by the said domain
name; and (iii) the Respondents are not making legitimate noncommercial or fair
use of the said domain name, without intending to mislead and divert consumers
or to tarnish Complainant’s <THE BODY SHOP> trademark and service mark”);
see also Vapor Blast Mfg. Co. v. R &
S Tech., Inc., FA 96577 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 27, 2001) (finding that
Respondent’s commercial use of the domain name to confuse and divert Internet
traffic is not a legitimate use of the domain name).
Furthermore
Respondent has submitted no proof and there is no proof in the record that
indicates Respondent is commonly known by GLENNS TOYOTA, USED TOYOTA LEXUS, <glennstoyota.com> or <usedtoyotalexus.com>. Therefore,
Respondent has failed to establish that it has any rights to or legitimate
interests in the disputed domain names under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See RMO, Inc. v. Burbridge, FA
96949 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 16, 2001) (Interpreting Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) "to
require a showing that one has been commonly known by the domain name prior to
registration of the domain name to prevail"); see also Gallup Inc. v. Amish Country Store, FA 96209 (Nat. Arb.
Forum Jan. 23, 2001) (finding that Respondent does not have rights in a domain
name when Respondent is not known by the mark).
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) has been established.
Respondent’s <glennstoyota.com> domain name
does not resolve to an active website. Passively holding a domain name
confusingly similar to a registered trademark holder’s mark is evidence of bad
faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Martineau, FA 95359 (Nat. Arb. Forum
Aug. 30, 2000) (finding that the Respondent’s failure to submit an assertion of
good faith intent to use the domain name, in addition to the passive holding of
the domain name, reveal that the Respondent registered and uses the domain name
in bad faith); see also Caravan Club v.
Mrgsale, FA 95314 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 30, 2000) (finding that Respondent
made no use of the domain name or website that connects with the domain name,
and that passive holding of a domain name permits an inference of registration
and use in bad faith).
Respondent is
not related to or authorized by Complainant or Complainant’s parent company,
TMC. Thus, Respondent has no right to incorporate Complainant’s mark into
Respondent’s domain name over the objections of the trademark holder. The Panel
finds that Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract Internet users to
its website for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with
Complainant’s mark with respect to the <usedtoyotalexus.com>
domain name as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of
Respondent’s website, which is evidence of bad faith registration and use
pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Kmart
v. Kahn, FA 127708 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 22, 2002) (finding that if
Respondent profits from its diversionary use of Complainant's mark when the
domain name resolves to commercial websites and Respondent fails to contest the
Complaint, it may be concluded that Respondent is using the domain name in bad
faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv)); see
also G.D. Searle & Co. v. Celebrex Drugstore, FA 123933 (Nat. Arb.
Forum Nov. 21, 2002) (finding that Respondent registered and used the domain
name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) because Respondent was using
the confusingly similar domain name to attract Internet users to its commercial
website).
Accordingly, the
Panel finds that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Having
established all three elements required under ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes
that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it
is Ordered that the <glennstoyota.com>
and <usedtoyotalexus.com>
domain names be TRANSFERRED from
Respondent to Complainant.
Judge Harold Kalina (Ret.), Panelist
Dated:
June 23, 2003
Click Here to return
to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home
Page