Bittrex, Inc. v. sanoop ks
Claim Number: FA1805001789700
Complainant is Bittrex, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Patchen M. Haggerty of Perkins Coie LLP, Washington. Respondent is sanoop ks (“Respondent”), India.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <globitrex.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and, to the best of his knowledge, has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on May 31, 2018; the Forum received payment on May 31, 2018.
On June 1, 2018, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <globitrex.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On June 5, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 25, 2018 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@globitrex.com. Also on June 5, 2018, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
Having received no response from Respondent, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On June 27, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed the Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.) as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant, Bittrex, Inc., is the third largest cryptocurrency exchange in the world. Complainant has been using the BITTREX mark in U.S. commerce in connection with its cryptocurrency exchange since February 2014. Complainant has rights in the BITTREX mark based upon its registration of the mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g., Reg. No. 5,380,786, registered Jan. 16, 2018). Respondent’s <globitrex.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s BITTREX mark because Respondent incorporates the BITTREX trademark in the domain name, omits a letter, and adds a generic term plus the “.com” generic top-level domain (“gTLD”).
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <globitrex.com> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the mark, nor has Complainant authorized Respondent to use the mark. Respondent fails to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Instead, Respondent uses the disputed domain name as a platform to offer competing cryptocurrency related services.
Respondent registered and is using the <globitrex.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent is using the disputed domain name to disrupt Complainant’s business by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark and offering competing goods and services. Additionally, Respondent registered the disputed domain name under a privacy service and failed to respond to a cease and desist letter.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant, Bittrex, Inc., is the third largest cryptocurrency exchange in the world. Complainant has been using the BITTREX mark in U.S. commerce in connection with its cryptocurrency exchange since February 2014. Complainant has rights in the BITTREX mark based upon its registration of the mark with the USPTO (e.g., Reg. No. 5,380,786, registered Jan. 16, 2018). Respondent’s <globitrex.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s BITTREX mark.
Respondent registered the <globitrex.com> domain name on April 24, 2018.
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <globitrex.com> domain name. Respondent uses the disputed domain name to resolve to a website that purports to offer competing cryptocurrency platform trading services.
Respondent registered and is using the <globitrex.com> domain name in bad faith.
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc., FA 95095 (Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also Talk City, Inc., D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”).
Complainant has rights in the BITTREX mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) based on its registration of the mark with the USPTO. Respondent’s <globitrex.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s BITTREX mark because the domain name incorporates Complainant’s mark, removes a letter from the mark, and adds a generic term and the “.com” gTLD.
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <globitrex.com> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name. Complainant has not authorized Respondent to use the BITTREX mark. Where a response is lacking, WHOIS information may be used to show that a respondent is not commonly known by a domain name, especially where the respondent has utilized a privacy service. See Kohler Co. v. Privacy Service, FA 1621573 (Forum July 2, 2015) (holding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) where “Privacy Service” was listed as the registrant of the disputed domain name). Respondent originally used a privacy service in registering its <globitrex.com> domain name, which was lifted at the initiation of this Proceeding (listing “Registration Private / Domains by Proxy, LLC” as registrant). The WHOIS information of record now identifies the registrant of the domain name as “sanoop ks.”
Respondent fails to use the <globitrex.com> domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). Respondent is using the disputed domain name in connection with a website that offers competing cryptocurrency related services. See General Motors LLC, FA 1659965 (Forum Mar. 10, 2016) (finding that “use of a domain to sell products and/or services that compete directly with a complainant’s business does not constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).”).
Respondent registered and uses the <globitrex.com> domain name in bad faith by using the disputed domain name to pass off as Complainant to disrupt Complainant’s business purportedly to offer competing goods and services. Use of a domain name to intentionally create a likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of a complainant constitutes bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Bittrex, Inc., FA 1760517 (Forum Dec. 27, 2017) (finding bad faith per Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) where “Respondent registered and uses the <lbittrex.com> domain name in bad faith by directing Internet users to a website that mimics Complainant’s own website in order to confuse users into believing that Respondent is Complainant, or is otherwise affiliated or associated with Complainant.”).
Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the BITTREX mark prior to registration of the <globitrex.com> domain name. Therefore, Respondent registered and uses the domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <globitrex.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.), Panelist
Dated: July 9, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page