Meguiar's, Inc. v. Ernesto Duch
Claim Number: FA1504001614952
Complainant: Meguiar's, Inc. of Irvine, California, United States of America.
Complainant Representative: Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP of Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Respondent: Ernesto Duch of Madrid, Spain.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registry: Fox Shadow, LLC
Registrar: Cronon AG
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.
Alan L. Limbury, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: April 16, 2015
Commencement: April 17, 2015
Default Date: May 4, 2015
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.
Even though 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 the domain name should be suspended:
[URS
1.2.6.1] The registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a
word mark:
(i) for which Complainant holds a valid national or
regional registration 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.
As to this element, Complainant is a manufacturer of products for cleaning and protecting automotive surfaces. Complainant has demonstrated that it is the owner of several United States registered trademarks for MEGUIAR’S in respect of various cleaning preparations, including No. 1,884,764, registered on March 28, 1995, bearing date of first use in commerce of February 17, 1960, and that the mark is in current use.
The domain name was registered by Respondent on February 24, 2015. It comprises Complainant's mark without the apostrophe, together with the gTLD ".cleaning", indicative of the kind of goods the Complainant provides. The Examiner finds that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark.
Complainant has established this element.
[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no rights to or legitimate interest in the domain name.
As to this element, Complainant asserts that Respondent has no relationship, connection, endorsement, or association with Complainant; that no evidence in the WHOIS suggests that Respondent is known by “Meguiar”; and that, because the domain name currently resolves to a holding page created by the registrar, Respondent cannot assert that it is making a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate use of the domain name.
In the absence of any Response, the Examiner finds that Complainant has shown prima facie, that Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name.
Complainant has established this element.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith, such as: By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s web site or other online
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.
As to this element, Complainant says that given Respondent’s registration of the domain name long after Complainant registered its trademark and in light of the obvious link between the “.cleaning” gTLD and the nature of Complainant’s products, Respondent clearly registered the domain name with the MEGUIAR’S mark in mind and with a bad faith intent to trade on the goodwill Complainant has acquired in its mark. Accordingly, good faith use is inconceivable.
The Examiner finds that Complainant has established that the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
Complainant has established this element.
After reviewing 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:
Alan L. Limbury, Examiner
Dated: May 07, 2015
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page