Deutsche Lufthansa AG v. PrivacyDotLink 3455350
Claim Number: FA1712001762821
Complainant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG of Frankfurt, Germany.
Complainant Representative:
Complainant Representative: Rauschhofer Rechtsanwaelte of Wiesbaden, Germany.
Respondent: PrivacyDotLink Customer 3455350 of Seven Mile Beach, International, KY.
Respondent Representative: None
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Interlink Co., Ltd.
Registrars: Uniregistrar Corp
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.
James Bridgeman, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: December 14, 2017
Commencement: December 15, 2017
Default Date: January 2, 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") .
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
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.
On the evidence submitted Complainant is the owner of EUTM LUFTHANSA, registration number 001212539 registered on 02/26/2001. Respondent’s domain name is identical to Complainant’s registered trademark. Respondent has failed or neglected to respond to the Complaint. It is most improbable that Respondent has any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name as it is identical to Complainant’s distinctive trademark.
Complainant has made a prima facie case that it is probable that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith because the domain is offered for sale indicating no further interest of the Respondent, see 4b(i) policy. To hide his identity the Respondent uses a proxy service. The Respondent has no plausible reasons for choosing and using this unique non-generic name and trademark as a domain name. It is impossible to imagine how Respondent might use the disputed domain name for any reason other than to pretend that it relates to an official LUFTHANSA website or email address.
After reviewing the Complainant’s 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 names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:
<lufthansa.earth>
James Bridgeman, Examiner
Dated: January 04, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page