AutoAnything, Inc. v. YANGMIN FANG / Huli Jing Internet Holdings
Claim Number: FA1412001593348
Complainant is AutoAnything, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by CitizenHawk, Inc., California, USA. Respondent is YANGMIN FANG / Huli Jing Internet Holdings (“Respondent”), Belize.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <autoanyting.com>, registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com.
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 December 4, 2014; the National Arbitration Forum received payment on December 4, 2014.
On December 8, 2014, PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <autoanyting.com> domain name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com has verified that Respondent is bound by the PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.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 December 15, 2014, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of January 5, 2015 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@autoanyting.com. Also on December 15, 2014, 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.
Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On January 8, 2015, 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.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant uses the AUTOANYTHING mark for the marketing of mail order services featuring automotive parts and related tools and accessories.
Complainant holds a registration for the service mark AUTOANYTHING, on file with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") (Registry No. 3,452,544, registered June 24, 2008).
Since 1999, Complainant has used the domain name <autoanything.com> to provide its online retail offerings.
Respondent registered the domain name <autoanyting.com> on May 25, 2003.
The domain name is confusingly similar to the AUTOANYTHING mark.
Respondent has no trademark or other rights in the domain name, and there is no indication that Respondent has been commonly known by the domain name.
Respondent has not made a bona fide use of the domain name. The domain name resolves to a website promoting links to third-party websites,
some directing users to commercial competitors of Complainant in the sale of mail order automotive parts.
Respondent presumably generates referral revenue from the operation of the featured links.
Respondent lacks rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name.
Respondent’s use of the domain name disrupts Complainant’s business.
The domain name is a typo-squatted version of the AUTOANYTHING mark.
Respondent registered and uses the domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response to the Complaint in this proceeding in compliance with the requirements of the Policy and its associated Rules. However, in an e-mail message addressed to the National Arbitration Forum, Respondent recited as follows: “We are willing to hand over the 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 to or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
iii. the same 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 does not contest the material allegations of the Complaint, and, in particular, it does not contest Complainant’s request that the domain name be transferred to Complainant. Rather Respondent has indicated in a written communication its willingness to allow the domain name to 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.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <autoanyting.com> domain name be forthwith TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Terry F. Peppard, Panelist
Dated: January 9, 2015
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page