Garmin Switzerland GmbH v. Rakesh Gupta
Claim Number: FA1807001798991
Complainant is Garmin Switzerland GmbH (“Complainant”), represented by Sam Korte of Garmin International, Inc., Kansas, USA. Respondent is Rakesh Gupta (“Respondent”), India.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <garminsupportnumber.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.
Kenneth L. Port as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on July 27, 2018; the Forum received payment on July 27, 2018.
On July 30, 2018, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <garminsupportnumber.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 August 2, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of August 22, 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@garminsupportnumber.com. Also on August 2, 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 August 24, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Kenneth L. Port 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, Garmin Switzerland GmbH, is one of the leading providers of GPS navigation devices and wearable technology. Complainant has rights in the GARMIN mark based upon its registration of the mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO”) (e.g., Reg. No. 2,288,989 registered Oct. 26, 1999). See Compl. Ex. C. Respondent’s <garminsupportnumber.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because Respondent includes the entire GARMIN mark in the domain name plus the generic terms “support” and “number.”
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <garminsupportnumber.com> domain name because Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and is not authorized or permitted to use Complainant’s mark in any fashion. Additionally, Respondent fails to use the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, Respondent uses the disputed domain name to divert users to a webpage which provides a fake customer support phone number. See Compl. Ex. F.
Respondent registered and uses the <garminsupportnumber.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent attempts to disrupt Complainant’s business and attract, for commercial gain, users to the disputed domain name’s webpage which features Complainant’s GARMIN mark in connection with a fake customer support phone number. See Compl. Ex. F. Further, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the GARMIN mark prior to registering the disputed domain name.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. The disputed domain name was registered on January 9, 2018
As Respondent has failed to file a response in this matter, the Panel shall make its determination based on the unrebutted and reasonable assertions of Complainant. As such, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered trademark, that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in or to the disputed domain name, and that Respondent has engaged in bad faith use and registration of the disputed domain name.
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. v. webnet-marketing, 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. v. Robertson, D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”).
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name, <garminsupportnumber.com>, is confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered trademark, GARMIN. Complainant has adequately plead its rights and interests in and to this trademark. Respondent arrives at the disputed domain name by taking Complainant’s entire mark and adding the words “support” and “number” plus the g TLD “.com.” This is insufficient to distinguish the disputed domain name from Complainant’s trademark.
As such, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark.
The Panel further finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in or to the disputed domain name. Respondent has no right, permission, or license to register the disputed domain name. Also, Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name.
Further, Respondent appears to fail to use the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, Respondent apparently uses the disputed domain name to divert users to a webpage which provides a fake customer support phone number. See Compl. Ex. F.
As such, the Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in or to the disputed domain name.
The Panel further finds that Respondent engaged in bad faith use and registration of the disputed domain name. Respondent apparently registered and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith by attempting to disrupt Complainant’s business and attract users for commercial gain. Complainant alleges that Respondent does this by using a confusingly similar domain name that resolves to a webpage displaying a fake customer support phone number. Use of a confusingly similar domain name in order to provide competing goods or services may be evidence of bad faith under Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) and/or (iv). See Walgreen Co. v. MUHAMMAD SALEEM / WALGREENSGENERAL TRADING LLC, FA 1790453 (Forum Jul. 1, 2018) (“Respondent’s registration and use of the confusingly similar <walgreensshop.com> domain name in furtherance of trading competitively on Complainant’s WALGREENS trademark demonstrates Respondent’s bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) and (iv).”). Complainant provides a screenshot of the disputed domain name’s resolving webpage which features Complainant’s mark in connection with a customer support phone number. See Compl. Ex. F. Complainant claims the phone number located at the disputed domain name’s webpage is fake and Respondent commercially benefits from this confusion. Id. Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) and (iv).
Furthermore, Complainant argues that Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the GARMIN mark prior to Respondent’s registration of the <garminsupportnumber.com> domain name. Here, Complainant provides a screenshot of the webpage associated with the disputed domain name which show Respondent displaying the GARMIN mark and offering customer support services for Complainant’s products. See Compl. Ex. F. Therefore, this fact and the totality of the circumstances, the Panel finds that Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s prior rights in and to the trademark GARMIN.
As such, the Panel finds that Respondent has engaged in bad faith use and registration of the disputed domain name.
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <garminsupportnumber.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Kenneth L. Port, Panelist
Dated: August 27, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page