Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II v. DomainCostClub.com / DCC Private Registrations et al.
Claim Number: FA1907001853884




   Complainant: Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II of Manhattan beach, CA, United States of America
Complainant Representative: Kleinberg & Lerner, LLP Marshall A Lerner of Los Angeles, CA, United States of America

   Respondent: DomainCostClub.com Adrian Ramirez of Carlsbad, CA, United States of America


   Registries: dot Science Limited
   Registrars: Global Domains International, Inc. DBA DomainCostClub.com


   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.
   Kendall C. Reed, as Examiner


   Complainant Submitted: July 25, 2019
   Commencement: July 26, 2019
   Response Date: August 6, 2019
   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.


   Findings of Fact: Respondent�s response consists of a statement that it is a type of privacy service, and some other person or entity is the registrant. The examiner notes that whereas there is nothing inherently wrong with the use of a privacy service, the Registrant is as indicated in the WhoIs record for purposes of the URS Procedure, and notice thereto of this URS proceeding is sufficient. Complainant has demonstrated that it is the owner of the USPTO trademark registration for SKX (the �Complainant�s Mark�) and that this mark is currently used in commerce. The Complainant has also demonstrated that the Dispute Domain Name resolves to an Internet parking page.


URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.

[URS] 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 Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complaint�s Mark. The Disputed Domain Name <skx.science> contains the same three letters in the same order as the Complainant�s Mark, SKX. The addition of the Top-Level Domain �.science� is a difference that does not create a meaningful distinction for purposes of the URS. As such, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant�s Mark.

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

Determined: Finding for Complainant 

Respondent does not have legitimate right or interest to the Disputed Domain Name. Complaint establishes that it has not authorized Respondent to use the Complainant�s Mark in any way or for any purpose. Complainant has also established that the Disputed Domain Name resolves to an Internet parking page, which is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a fair use for purposes of the URS

[URS] 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 Respondent 

The Complainant has failed to establish this element of the URS Procedure by clear and convincing evidence. The Complainant�s Mark consist of three letters, �SKX.� This combination of letters is not so distinctive and/or well known that it would be implausible to conclude Respondent did not intentionally copy Complainant�s Mark when it registered the Disputed Domain Name. Said the other way around, under the �clear and convincing� standard the examiner cannot dismiss the possibility that Respondent developed this combination of letters independently and registered the Disputed Domain Name innocently for purpose of the URS.


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. 


After reviewing the parties submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant has NOT 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 returned to the control of Respondent:

  1. skx.science


Kendall C. Reed
Dated: August 9, 2019



Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page