Qualcomm Incorporated v. vildan erdogan
Claim Number: FA1810001811190
Complainant is Qualcomm Incorporated (“Complainant”), represented by Diana S. Bae of Arent Fox LLP, District of Columbia, USA. Respondent is vildan erdogan (“Respondent”), Turkey.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <qualcommquickcharge.com> (‘the Domain Name’), registered with NameSilo, LLC.
The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
Dawn Osborne as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on October 10, 2018; the Forum received payment on October 10, 2018.
On October 11, 2018, NameSilo, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <qualcommquickcharge.com> domain name is registered with NameSilo, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameSilo, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameSilo, 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 October 19, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of November 8, 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@qualcommquickcharge.com. Also on October 19, 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 November 11, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Dawn Osborne 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
The Complainant’s contentions can be summarized as follows:
The Complainant is the owner of the QUALCOMM and QUALCOMM QUICK CHARGE marks registered, inter alia, in the USA for communication related goods with first use recorded as 1985 and 2014 respectively. QUALCOMM is also registered as a trade mark in Turkey where the Respondent is based since 2001. The Complainant has owned Qualcomm.com since 1988.
The Domain Name registered in 2018 is identical to the QUALCOMM QUICK CHARGE mark adding only the gTLD .com which is not taken into account for the confusing similarity analysis.
The Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name. The Respondent is not commonly known by the Domain Name and has not been authorized by the Complainant to use it. The Domain Name is not making legitimate noncommercial fair use of the Domain Name or using it for a bona fide offering of goods or services.
The Domain Name has been offered for sale for almost US$ 1M. This is a price far exceeding the out of pocket expenses for registration of the Domain Name and bad faith under Policy 4(b)(i). Inactive use is also bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
The Complainant is the owner of the QUALCOMM and QUALCOMM QUICK CHARGE trademarks registered, inter alia, in the USA for communication related goods with first use recorded as 1985 and 2014 respectively. QUALCOMM is also registered as a trade mark in Turkey where the Respondent is based since 2001. The Complainant has owned Qualcomm.com since 1988.
The Domain Name registered in 2018 has been offered for sale for $990 on the Internet.
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.”).
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Domain Name consists of the Complainant’s QUALCOMM QUICK CHARGE trade mark (registered in USA for, inter alia, communication related services with first use recorded as 2014) and the gTLD .com.
Adding a gTLD does not distinguish the Domain Name from the Complainant’s QUALCOMM QUICK CHARGE mark which is the distinctive component of the Domain Name. See Red Hat Inc. v. Haecke, FA 726010 (Forum July 24, 2006) (concluding that the redhat.org domain name is identical to the complainant's red hat mark because the mere addition of the TLD was insufficient to differentiate the disputed domain name from the mark).
Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Domain Name is identical for the purpose of the Policy to a mark in which the Complainant has rights and it is, therefore, not necessary to consider the Complainant’s additional rights in QUALCOMM.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant has not authorized the use of its mark. The Respondent has not answered this Complaint and there is no evidence or reason to suggest the Respondent is, in fact, commonly known by the Domain Name. See Alaska Air Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Alaska Airlines v. Song Bin, FA1408001574905 (Forum September 17, 2014) (holding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name as demonstrated by the WHOIS information and based on the fact that the complainant had not licensed or authorized the respondent to use its ALASKA AIRLINES mark).
There has been no use of the Domain Name so it has not been used for a bona fide offering of goods and services or a legitimate noncommercial fair use.
As such the Panelist finds that the Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name and that the Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
The Respondent has registered a domain name containing the Complainant’s trade mark QUALCOMM QUICK CHARGE without explanation and which reflects exactly a brand of the Complainant registered before the Domain Name. The Respondent has not answered the Complaint as to why it registered a Domain Name exactly reflecting the Complainant’s existing brand. The Domain Name has also been offered for sale for a sum substantially above the out of pocket costs of registration of the Domain Name.
Accordingly, the Panelist finds that the Domain Name has been registered and used in bad faith pursuant to Policy 4(b)(i) of the Policy and there is no need to consider any additional allegations of bad faith.
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <qualcommquickcharge.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Dawn Osborne, Panelist
Dated: November 15, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page