BNP PARIBAS v. Chen Yu
Claim Number: FA1612001705272
Complainant: BNP PARIBAS of PARIS, France.
Complainant Representative:
Complainant Representative: Nameshield of Angers, France.
Respondent: Chen Yu of chang chun shi, ji lin, International, CN.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DotStore Inc.
Registrars: Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd. d/b/a HiChina (www.net.cn)
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: December 1, 2016
Commencement: December 1, 2016
Default Date: December 16, 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").
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant, BNP PARIBAS, is a French based company known as one of the most famous banks in the world. Complainant is the owner of the mark – BNP PARIBAS, including International Trademark Reg. No. 728598 registered on February 2, 2000.
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 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: By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant's web site or other online 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.
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 BNP PARIBAS mark, including International Trademark Reg. No. 728598 registered on February 2, 2000.
The disputed domain name includes the Complainant's mark in its entirety, together with the gTLD ".store".
[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 BNP PARIBAS. The domain name is inactive. 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 an inactive page, 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:
<bnpparibas.store>
Jonathan Agmon, Examiner
Dated: December 21, 2016
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page