HOCHTIEF Aktiengesellschaft v. Zhang Peng
Claim Number: FA1502001603665
Complainant: HOCHTIEF Aktiengesellschaft of Essen, Germany.
Complainant Representative:
Complainant Representative: Beetz&Partner Patentanwaelte of Muenchen, Germany.
Respondent: Zhang Peng of Xi An, Shan Xi, International, CN.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Jiangsu Bangning Science & Technology Co.,Ltd.
Registrars: Jiangsu Bangning Science & technology Co. Ltd.
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 Examiner in this proceeding.
Jonathan Agmon, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: February 6, 2015
Commencement: February 10, 2015
Default Date: February 25, 2015
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the 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, Hochtief Aktiengesellschaft (AG), is a German corporation and one of the world's leading groups in the field of construction. The Complainant is active for over 140 years and has over 80,000 employees. In the year 2013 the Complainant had a sales turnover of 25.69 billion Euros.
Complainant is the owner of the mark – HOCHTIEF, worldwide for many years, including German Reg. No. 1102406 – HOCHTIEF (word mark) with the registration date of February 13, 1987 and CTM Reg. No. 60061– HOCHTIEF (word mark) with the registration date of October 13, 1998.
This is further supported by the fact that the HOCHTIEF name has been submitted and verified with the Trade Mark Clearinghouse.
Complainant asserts the following regarding the Respondent: 1. The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark [URS/.usRS 1.2.6.1]: for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use 2. Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name [URS 1.2.6.2] 3. The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith [URS 1.2.6.3] such as: The domain name(s) was/were registered or are being used in bad faith [.usRS 1.2.6.3] such as: Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct.
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.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word mark: (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.
Determined: Finding for Complainant
Complainant is the owner of a trademark registration for HOCHTIEF mark, including German Reg. No. 1102406 – HOCHTIEF (word mark) with the registration date of February 13, 1987 and CTM Reg. No. 60061– HOCHTIEF (word mark) with the registration date of October 13, 1998.
The domain name includes the Complainant's mark in its entirety, together with the gTLD ".top".
[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
Determined: Finding for Complainant
There is no evidence that Respondent is known as HOCHTIEF. The domain name resolves to a parking page. Complainant has met its burden. Respondent provided no response to the complaint.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith. a. Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or d. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.
Determined: Finding for Complainant
Since Complainant's trademark was registered long before the disputed domain name was registered and the disputed name resolves to a parking website, the conclusion is that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith to attract for commercial gain and that Complainant has complied with URS 1.2.6.3 (b).
The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods.
The Examiner finds as follows:
1. The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods.
After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that
the 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:
<hochtief.top>
Jonathan Agmon, Examiner
Dated: March 1st, 2015
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page