Regions Bank v. Darla atkins
Claim Number: FA1805001786409
Complainant is Regions Bank (“Complainant”), represented by Rachel Hofstatter of Steptoe & Johnson LLP, District of Columbia, USA. Respondent is Darla Atkins (“Respondent”), Tennessee, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <regionscryptocurrency.com>, registered with 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 Panelist in this proceeding.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on May 14, 2018; the Forum received payment on May 14, 2018.
On May 14, 2018, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. 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, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 4, 2018 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@regionscryptocurrency.com. Also on May 15, 2018, 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.
Having received no response from Respondent, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On June 6, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed the Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) 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 name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant, Regions Bank, is one of the nation’s largest full-service providers of consumer and commercial banking, wealth management and mortgage products and services. Complainant asserts rights in the REGIONS mark through registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g., Reg. No. 1,881,600, registered Feb. 28, 1995). Respondent’s <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because it merely adds the generic term “cryptocurrency” and the generic top-level domain (“gTLD”) “.com.”
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name because Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name and Complainant has not authorized the Respondent to utilize its mark. Further, Respondent fails to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Instead, Respondent uses the domain name to host an inactive website that is currently unavailable. Additionally, Respondent offered to sell the domain name to Complainant for a price exceeding out-of-pocket expenses.
Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith. Respondent offered to sell the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name to the Complainant. Respondent also uses the website to host an unavailable webpage. Respondent had knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the mark prior to Respondent’s registration due to the similarity of the domain name to Complainant’s mark.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant, Regions Bank, is one of the nation’s largest full-service providers of consumer and commercial banking, wealth management and mortgage products and services. Regions Bank operates approximately 1,500 banking offices and 1,900 ATMs across the South, Midwest, and Texas. Complainant owns rights in the REGIONS mark through registration with the USPTO (e.g., Reg. No. 1,881,600, registered Feb. 28, 1995). Respondent’s <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because it adds the generic term “cryptocurrency” and the generic top-level domain (“gTLD”) “.com.”
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name. Respondent uses the domain name to host an inactive website that is currently unavailable. Additionally, Respondent offered to sell the domain name to Complainant for $4,500.00, a price exceeding out-of-pocket expenses.
Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith.
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc., FA 95095 (Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also Talk City, Inc., D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”).
Complainant owns rights in the REGIONS mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) through registration with the USPTO. Respondent’s <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because it contains the mark in its entirety, adds the generic term “cryptocurrency,” and adds the gTLD “.com.”
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name. Complainant has not authorized Respondent to use the REGIONS mark. Absent contradicting evidence in the record that a respondent was authorized to use complainant’s marks in a domain name, the respondent may be assumed to lack rights and legitimate interests in the domain name. The WHOIS information lists the registrant of the domain name as “Darla atkins.” Therefore, Respondent is not commonly by the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).
Respondent has failed to use the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services, or for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) and (iii). Respondent operates an inactive page and has made no demonstrable preparations to use the website. Use of a domain to host an inactive website is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) and (iii). Kohler Co., FA 1737910 (Forum Aug. 4, 2017) (”Respondent has not made a bona fide offering of goods or services, or a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the domain. Respondent’s <kohler-corporation.com> resolves to an inactive webpage displaying the message “website coming soon!”). Here, Respondent’s <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name resolves to a website that features the message, “website coming soon.”
Respondent’s offer to the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name to Complainant for an amount in excess of out-of-pocket expenses is also evidence of a lack of rights and legitimate interests.
Respondent has registered and is using the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i), because Respondent offered to sell the domain name to Complainant at price in excess of out-of-pocket expenses. See Campmor, Inc., FA 197972 (Forum Nov. 5, 2003) (“Respondent registered the disputed domain name and offered to sell it to Complainant for $10,600. This demonstrates bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(i).”).
Respondent registered and is using the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii), because Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the REGIONS mark prior to Respondent’s registration of the domain name.
Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) because Respondent uses the domain name to host an inactive website. See Marsh Supermarkets Company, LLC, formerly known as Marsh Supermarkets, Inc., FA 1532854 (Forum Feb. 25, 2014) (“Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and is using the <marshsupermarkets.com> domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) because Respondent has failed to make an active use of the disputed domain name.”).
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <regionscryptocurrency.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.), Panelist
Dated: June 20, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page