URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

Fareportal Inc. v. cui dao en
Claim Number: FA1509001638602

DOMAIN NAME

<cheapoair.xyz>

PARTIES

	Complainant: Fareportal Inc. of New York, NY, United States of America
	Complainant Representative: Brittany L Kaplan of New York, NY, United States of America

	Respondent: cui dao en cui dao en of shenzhen, GD, II, CN

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

	Registries: XYZ.COM LLC
	Registrars: CHENGDU WEST DIMENSION DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.

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.
	Ho-Hyun Nahm, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

	Complainant Submitted: September 18, 2015
	Commencement: September 21, 2015
	Default Date: October 6, 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").

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]

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

Complainant prevailed on element (i) in that the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that it is in current use. The record makes clear that “the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that [it] is in current use,” and the registration is identical to the second-level portion of the disputed domain name, as required by paragraph 1.2.6.1 of the URS.

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

Determined: Finding for Complainant

Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name, which is composed with the CHEAPOAIR trademark. He has not been authorized to use the domain name and he has no identical trademark nor offers related services. Respondent has not made any demonstrable preparations to use the domain name in relation with a bona fide offering of goods or services. He is not commonly known under the domain name at issue and does not make any fair and noncommercial use of that domain name.

[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

Respondent uses the disputed domain name to misdirect or ‘bait’ Internet users seeking Fareportal’s travel-related services to the disputed domain name website. Internet users who intend to visit the website for purposes of utilizing Fareportal’s travel-related services may type ‘cheapoair’ into the search bar of their web browser, only to be misdirected to the disputed domain name website which is subsequently redirected to other websites. Respondent has intentionally used the disputed domain name to attract Internet users by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark thereby gaining unjustified profit.

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:

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:

cheapoair.xyz

Ho-Hyun Nahm
Examiner
Dated: October 8, 2015

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page