URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

 

BNP PARIBAS v. WhoisGuard, Inc.

Claim Number: FA1811001815600

 

DOMAIN NAME

<bnp-paribas.xyz>

 

PARTIES

Complainant:  BNP PARIBAS, of Paris, France.

Complainant Representative: Nameshield of Angers, France.

 

Respondent:  WhoisGuard, Inc. / WhoisGuard Protected, of Panama, Panama, International, PA.

Respondent Representative:  None

 

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

Registries:  XYZ.COM LLC

Registrars:  NameCheap, Inc.

 

EXAMINER

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.

 

Jeffrey M. Samuels, as Examiner.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted: November 9, 2018

Commencement: November 9, 2018   

Default Date: November 27, 2018

 

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").

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.

 

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Clear and convincing evidence.

 

FINDINGS and DISCUSSION

 

Complainant is the owner of the international trademark BNP Paribas, which was registered on February 23, 2000.  The trademark is also registered with the TMCH.

 

The disputed domain name bnp-paribas.xyz reverts to Complainant’s corporate site at group.bnpparibas.

 

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.    The Examiner finds that the disputed domain name is, for all intents and purposes, identical to the mark BNP Paribas, which is the subject of a valid national or regional registration and is in current use. The domain name incorporates the mark in full, adding only a hyphen and the non-distinctive top-level domain “.xyz”.

 

2.    The Examiner finds that Registrant has no legitimate right or interest in the disputed domain name.  The evidence establishes that Complainant has not authorized Respondent’s use of its mark, that Respondent has no affiliation with Complainant, and that Respondent is not using the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or engaging in a noncommercial or fair use of the domain name.

 

3.    The Examiner finds that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.  By using the domain name, Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s site by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of Registrant’s site or of a product or service on that site.

 

 

DETERMINATION

After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that

Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence. The Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:

 

bnp-paribas.xyz

 

 

 

Jeffrey M. Samuels, Examiner

Dated:  November 27, 2018

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page