Lockheed Martin Corporation v. James Luning
Claim Number: FA1705001730674
Complainant is Lockheed Martin Corporation (“Complainant”), represented by Sarah E Bro of McDermott Will & Emery LLP, U.S.A. Respondent is James Luning (“Respondent”), Illinois, U.S.A.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <815skunkworks.com>, <815skunkworks.info>, <815skunkworks.net>, <815skunkworks.org>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Disputed Domain Names”).
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 Panelist in this proceeding.
Kendall Reed as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on May 8, 2017; the Forum received payment on May 8, 2017.
On May 10, 2017, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <815skunkworks.com>, <815skunkworks.info>, <815skunkworks.net>, <815skunkworks.org> domain names are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On May 15, 2017, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 5, 2017 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@815skunkworks.com, postmaster@815skunkworks.info, postmaster@815skunkworks.net, and postmaster@815skunkworks.org. Also on May 15, 2017, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
On May 16, 2017, Respondent filed a response with the Forum, and on May 30, 2017, Respondent filed an additional submission with the Forum.
Complainant did not file an additional submission.
On June 7, 2017, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Kendall Reed as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.
Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant asserts the following:
1. it has ownership rights in the trademark SKUNK WORKS by virtue common law usage and by virtue of several registered trademarks issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “Complainant’s Marks”);
2. the Disputed Domain Names are similar to Complainant’s Marks;
3. Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Names; and
4. The Disputed Domains were registered and are being used by Respondent in bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent asserts in both his Response and Additional Submission that:
1. he has not used the Disputed Domain Name for any purpose; and
2. when he registered the Disputed Domain Names, he had no intention of doing anything with them other than perhaps to put up a personal photo gallery.
Respondent further states: “I would gladly delete the domains and move forward as I really have no monetary or business interest in the domains, but they have been locked due to this dispute,” and “Again, I would request that this dispute [be] dropped, at which time the domains will be deleted from existence when the hold is released on them at GoDaddy.com.”
As Respondent is amenable to releasing the Disputed Domain Names, there is no dispute between the parties. As such, the Panel elects to forgo the traditional UDRP analysis and immediately order the transfer of the Disputed Domain Names to Complainant. See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where Respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to Complainant . . . Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.”).
On the basis of the foregoing, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <815skunkworks.com>, <815skunkworks.info>, <815skunkworks.net>, and <815skunkworks.org> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Kendall Reed, Panelist
Dated: June 12, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page