NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM
URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


TELE PIZZA S.A.U. v. Centro de Belleza AgeGold SL
Claim Number: FA1407001568537


DOMAIN NAME

<telepizza.club>


PARTIES


   Complainant: TELE PIZZA S.A.U. of SAN SEBASTIAN DE LOS REYES (MADRID), Spain
  
Complainant Representative: CORE Association of Geneva, Switzerland

   Respondent: Centro de Belleza AgeGold SL Alvaro Amaya Sanchez of Jerez de la Frontera, Cadiz, II, Spain
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS


   Registries: .CLUB DOMAINS, LLC
   Registrars: Soluciones Corporativas IP, SLU

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.
   Neil Anthony Brown, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY


   Complainant Submitted: July 8, 2014
   Commencement: July 8, 2014
   Default Date: July 23, 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: It is clear from the evidence presented by Complainant that the Registrant registered the domain name without any right to do so and with the intention of selling it and that it then advertised the domain name for sale.

  

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.


[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word mark:
  (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
  (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
  (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The registered domain name is identical to a word mark for which Complainant holds a valid Spanish and therefore national registration that is in current use.


[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


Complainant did not authorize the registrant to register or use its registered trademark as a domain name. The disputed domain was registered to be sold as evinced in a screenshot of the webpage www.telepizza.club that advertised the domain name for sale.


[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
  a. Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
  b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
  c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
  d. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


Complainant proved that pursuant to URS 1.2.6.3 (a) the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith, as the Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the Complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name.


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:


  1. The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods. 

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:

  1. telepizza.club

 

Neil Anthony Brown
Examiner
Dated: July 24, 2014

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page