URS FINAL DETERMINATION
Lockheed Martin Corporation v. Rong Cheng Shi Kun Yu Fu Shi You Xian Gong Si et al.
Claim Number: FA1505001619833
DOMAIN NAME
<f-35.top>
<f-35.wang>
<f-35.xyz>
PARTIES
Complainant: Lockheed Martin Corporation of Bethesda, MD, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: McDermott Will & Emery LLP
Lynne M. J. Boisineau of Irvine, CA, United States of America
|
Respondent: Rong Cheng Shi Kun Yu Fu Shi You Xian Gong Si HOU GUANGHUI of rongchengshi, II, China | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Jiangsu Bangning Science & Technology Co.,Ltd.,Zodiac Leo Limited,XYZ.COM LLC | |
Registrars: XinNet Technology Corporation,Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd,Xin Net Technology Corp. |
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. | |
David L. Kreider Esq,, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: May 18, 2015 | |
Commencement: May 22, 2015 | |
Response Date: June 12, 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"). |
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
Findings of Fact: Complainant alleges that its F-35 Mark is famous for use in connection with one of the world’s most advanced fighter aircraft, and a variety of goods and services related thereto. Complainant is involved in licensing its Mark to others for clothing goods, toys, novelty items, and office and home goods. Through the licensing and sale of such products, the Mark has acquired fame and distinctiveness amongst general consumers, reaching well beyond Complainant’s government and defense customers. |
URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, 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 asserts that it is entitled to a presumption of ownership, validity, and the exclusive right to use its F-35 trademark (“Mark”) in connection with the goods and services named in its numerous registration certificates, including the registration record submitted in this matter. 15 U.S.C. §1057(b). [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant Complainant alleges that Respondent is neither affiliated with, nor has it been licensed or permitted to use Complainant’s Mark or any domain names incorporating the Mark. Respondent is not commonly known by the F-35.top, F-35.wang, or F-35.xyz domains (“Domain Names”). The Domain Names fully incorporate the Complainant’s well established trademark, an arbitrary term for which there is no reason to expect legitimate third party use. The Domain Names are linked to inactive websites, which state “[t]his webpage is not available.” The Respondent alleges that the Domain Names will, at an unspecified future time, be used for Respondent's on-line business selling clothing and fashion accessories, including T-shits and hats, having nothing to do with the Complainant's trade mark and that "F means fashion and 35 is Respondent's lucky number".
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant The Examiner finds that the Domain Names have been registered and used in bad faith for the purpose of disrupting Complainant’s business and to intentionally attract for commercial gain, Internet users to the Domain Names by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s Mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Domain Names. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent’s continued use and registration of the Domain Names will cause significant disruption to Complainant’s business. The Respondent merely denies having any intention to create a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's Mark, but presents no plausible evidence to the contrary. 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:
|
David L. Kreider Esq,
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page