SANOFI v. GAO WENHAO
Claim Number: FA1703001720119
Complainant: SANOFI of PARIS, France.
Complainant Representative: Marchais Associes of Paris, France.
Respondent: GAO WENHAO of guangzhoushi, guangdong, International, CN.
Respondent Representative: None
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Taipei City Government
Registrars: Shanghai Meicheng Technology Information Development Co., Ltd.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
Honorable Karl V. Fink (Ret.), as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: March 6, 2017
Commencement: March 7, 2017
Default Date: March 22, 2017
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.
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.
1.2.6.1. that the registered domain name is 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 .usURS complaint is filed.
1.2.6.2. that the Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
1.2.6.3. that the domain was registered or is being used in bad faith.
Additional URS sections provide:
8.4 If the Examiner finds that the Complainant has not met its burden, or that genuine issues of material fact remain in regards to any of the elements, the Examiner will reject the Complainant under the relief available under the .usURS. That is, the Complaint shall be dismissed if the Examiner finds that evidence was presented or is available to the Examiner that the use of the domain name in question is a non-infringing use or fair use of the trademark.
8.5 Where there is any genuine contestable issue as to whether a domain name registration and use of a trademark are in bad faith, the Complainant will be denied, the .usURS proceeding will be terminated without prejudice, e.g. a .usURS Appeal, .usDRP, or a court proceeding may be utilized. The .usURS is not intended for use in any proceedings with open questions of fact, but only clear cases of trademark abuse.
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 domain name contains Complaint’s Sanofi mark and is confusingly similar to the mark. Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the domain name and the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith.
The Examiner hereby ORDERS the following domain name be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.
<sanofi.taipei>
Honorable Karl V. Fink (Ret.), Examiner
Dated: March 23, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page