3S-Smart Software Solution v. Huijie Cao
Claim Number: FA1708001743028
Complainant: 3S-Smart Software Solution of Kempten, Germany.
Complainant Representative: VKK Patentanwälte of Kempten, Germany.
Respondent: Huijie Cao of Suzhou, Jiangsu, International, CN.
Respondent Representative: N/A
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: .CLUB DOMAINS, LLC; ARUBA S.p.A.; DotOnline Inc.
Registrars: GoDaddy.com, LLC
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.
David L. Kreider, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: August 4, 2017
Commencement: August 7, 2017
Default Date: August 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.
An Internet search by the Examiner reveals that CoDeSyS stands for controller development system, which is a development environment for programming controller applications, developed and maintained by Complainant. The Complainant’s evidence shows that codesys is a registered trademark in Germany and a number of other jurisdictions, chiefly used in relation to industrial automation software or software for controllers. Codesys is a distinctive term that has no meaning except in conjunction with automation software or the like.
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.
The Examiner finds that the disputed Domain Names incorporate Complainant’s registered mark and are identical to Complainant’s mark. Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the Domain Names. Because Complainant had registered its mark with the Trademark Clearing House, the Registrant is required to have clicked on the notice “Acknowledge Claim” when presented with the Trademark Claims Notice to complete registration of the name. Thus, respondent Registrant knew of the existence of the Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed Domain Name, yet proceeded to register or use the Domain Names, or both, in bad faith.
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.
David L. Kreider, Examiner
Dated: August 22, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page