NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM
URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
Pelco v. Chen Bingsheng et al.
Claim Number: FA1502001605319
DOMAIN NAME
<pelco.wang>
PARTIES
Complainant: Pelco of Clovis, CA, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: Nameshield
Laurent Becker of Angers, France
|
Respondent: Chen Bingsheng Chen Bingsheng of Shen Zhen Shi, Guang Dong, II, CN | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Zodiac Leo Limited | |
Registrars: Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd |
EXAMINER
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. | |
Honorable Robert T. Pfeuffer (Ret.), as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: February 18, 2015 | |
Commencement: February 19, 2015 | |
Default Date: March 6, 2015 | |
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"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Procedural Findings: | ||
Multiple Complainants: 1. The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark 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 3. The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith The domain name(s) was/were registered or are being used in bad faith | ||
Multiple Respondents: NONE |
Findings of Fact: NONE |
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: Determined: Finding for Complainant Complainant has prevailed on all elements. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent failed to assert any defenses.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant All sub factors were proved by Complainant. FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD 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:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties’ 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 name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Honorable Robert T. Pfeuffer (Ret.) Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page