URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


BNP PARIBAS v. Privacy Protect, LLC (PrivacyProtect.org)
Claim Number: FA1803001775308


DOMAIN NAME

<hellobank.club>


PARTIES


   Complainant: BNP PARIBAS of PARIS, France
  
Complainant Representative: Nameshield Enora MILLOCHEAU of Angers, France

   Respondent: Privacy Protect, LLC (PrivacyProtect.org) Domain Admin of Burlington, MA, US
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS


   Registries: .CLUB DOMAINS, LLC
   Registrars: PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com

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: March 12, 2018
   Commencement: March 12, 2018
   Default Date: March 27, 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").

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 


The registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a word mark: The Examiner finds that the Complainant holds a valid national or regional trademark registration and that is in current use. The Examiner finds that the Respondent’s domain name <hellobank.club> is substantially identical and confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark HELLO BANK.


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

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The Examiner finds that the Respondent has no rights or interests in respect of the domain name and is not related to the Complainant’s business. The Examiner also agrees that the Complainant doesn’t carry out any activity or business with the Respondent. The Examiner notes that the website in relation with the disputed domain name <HELLOBANK.CLUB> is inactive since its registration. The Examiner agrees with the Complainant’s contention that the Respondent has not developed demonstrable preparations to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.


[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 


The Examiner notes that the Complainant and its distinctive trademark "HELLO BANK" are known by a significant portion of the public in several countries through its online banking services. The Examiner also notes that the website in relation to the disputed domain name <HELLOBANK.CLUB> is inactive since its registration. The Examiner also notes that the Respondent has not developed demonstrable preparations to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. On those facts, the Examiner agrees with the Complainant’s contention that the Respondent has registered the domain name only in order to prevent the Complainant to register it and to reflect its trademark in a 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. hellobank.club

 

Ho-Hyun Nahm
Examiner
Dated: March 27, 2018

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page