URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

 

BALENCIAGA SA v. yuguotao

Claim Number: FA1601001656648

 

DOMAIN NAME

<balenciaga.wang>

 

PARTIES

Complainant:  BALENCIAGA SA of Paris, France.

Complainant Representative: 

Complainant Representative: INSIDERS of Paris, France.

 

Respondent:  yuguotao of Dalianshi, Liaoning, International, CN.

Respondent Representative:  «cFirstName» «cMiddle» «cLastName»

 

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

Registries:  Zodiac Leo Limited

Registrars:  eName Technology Co., 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.

 

Eleni Lappa, as Examiner.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted: January 15, 2016

Commencement: January 19, 2016   

Default Date: February 3, 2016

 

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

 

Balenciaga SA the Complainant in the present matter, is the owner of the international trademark BALENCIAGA and a well-known company, present in over 90 countries all over the world, including China selling leather accessories and apparel under its trademark and company name BALENCIAGA.

The Respondent, who appears to be a resident of China, registered the domain name balenciaga.wang on October 19th, 2015 for one year period without any prior legitimate interest to the trademark BALENCIAGA and with no authorization from Complainant to the registration of the disputed domain name. Respondent has filed no Response to the present Complaint.

 

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 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. Namely:

 

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/.usRS 1.2.6.2] 3. [if URS] The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith [URS 1.2.6.3] such as: [if .usRS] 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.

 

All three of the above three prerequisites are satisfied for the suspension of the domain name at issue <balenciaga.wang>, and in particular:

 

a.    The domain name <balenciaga.wang> is identical and/or confusingly similar to the prior registered rights of the complainant on the trademark BALENCIAGA currently in use and is also identical to the Complainant’s company name.

b.    Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name <balenciaga.wang>: the   pertinent issue according to the relevant URS provisions, is whether or not any actual rights exist on the part of the Respondent in relation to the name BALENCIAGA and no such evidence were offered by the Respondent.

c.    The disputed domain name <balenciaga.wang> was registered and used in bad faith by the Respondent, as the disputed domain name was registered and used after the trademark BALENCIAGA became well-known and therefore the Respondent knew or should have known of the Complainant’s prior rights related to the disputed domain and the risk of creating a likelihood of confusion between BALENCIAGA trademarks and the contested domain name which the Respondent nonetheless registered, leading its visitors to an inactive website which in fact disrupts Complainant’s business.

 

 

 

DETERMINATION

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.

<balenciaga.wang>

 

Eleni Lappa, Examiner

Dated:  February 03, 2016

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page