NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM
URS FINAL DETERMINATION
Pelco v. Ltd. Baltsys et al.
Claim Number: FA1404001555364
DOMAIN NAME
<pelco.systems>
PARTIES
Complainant: Pelco of Clovis, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: Nameshield
Laurent Becker of Angers, France
|
Respondent: Baltsys Ltd. Andrey Alekseev of St. Petersburg, II, Russia | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: SYSTEMS Registry | |
Registrars: Regional Network Information Center, JSC |
EXAMINER
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 Examiner in this proceeding. | |
Antonina Pakharenko-Anderson, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: April 23, 2014 | |
Commencement: April 23, 2014 | |
Response Date: April 29, 2014 | |
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the National Arbitration 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
Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment] |
URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant The Complainant holds a valid international registration for the word mark "PELCO" which is identical with the disputed domain name. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent does not hold any trademark rights to the word sign "PELCO", neither he is known by this name from WHOIS records. Respondent is not known by this name.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name. The Respondent did no rebut the arguments of the Complainant that he is a re-seller of similar products and thus is aware of the brand. FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties’ 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 name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Antonina Pakharenko-Anderson
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page