URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

Virgin Enterprises Limited v. ARIAN LOGHMANI
Claim Number: FA1605001676847

DOMAIN NAME

<virginactive.xyz>

PARTIES

	Complainant: Virgin Enterprises Limited of London, United Kingdom
	Complainant Representative: Stobbs Julius E Stobbs of Cambridge, United Kingdom

	Respondent: ARIAN LOGHMANI of LANE COVE, NSW, II, AU

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

	Registries: XYZ.COM LLC
	Registrars: Instra Corporation Pty 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.
	Ho-Hyun Nahm, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

	Complainant Submitted: May 27, 2016
	Commencement: May 27, 2016
	Default Date: June 13, 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

Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment]

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

The record makes clear that “the Complainant holds valid national registrations for the marks VIRGIN and VIRGIN ACTIVE and that they are in current use,” and that the mark VIRGIN ACTIVE is identical to the second-level portion of the disputed domain name, as required by paragraph 1.2.6.1 of the URS. Accordingly, Complainant has satisfied the first element of the URS.

[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

When Complainant wrote to Defendant clearly stating the case for objecting to the disputed domain name, Respondent did not, when given the opportunity, indicate any legitimate interest. Complainant contends that the disputed domain name has been 'reserved for Richard Branson' which clearly demonstrates that Defendant has no legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. In the absence of proper Response to Complainant's claims, Examiner agrees with Complainant.

[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

Examiner notes from Complainant's allegations that Complainant's marks are well known and have good reputation around the world. Complainant has submitted reliable evidence showing that Registrant has offered the domain name for sale, in accordance with URS 1.2.6.3(a). Complainant has also submitted reliable evidence showing that Registrant intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to registrant's website (a parking page for the company OnlyDomains), by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant's website or location or of a product or service on that website or location, in accordance with URS 1.2.6.3(d). Given the circumstances above, Examiner holds that Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.

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:

The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods.

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:

virginactive.xyz

Ho-Hyun Nahm
Examiner
Dated: June 15, 2016

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page