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.

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

[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.

Although Complainant says its parent company Valvoline Inc. founded Valvoline Instant Oil Change in 1986 and has used the domain name <vioc.com> for its website since 1997, Complainant has provided no evidence that the VIOC mark had acquired distinctiveness and widespread recognition prior to its registration in the United States in September 2019, with claimed first use in commerce only 6 months earlier. The website to which the <vioc.com> domain name resolves features the name Valvoline Instant Oil Change, not the VIOC mark. In China, Respondentï¿½s jurisdiction, the name under which Valvoline Inc. operates its two stores is Valvoline Automotive Service (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. There is no evidence that the VIOC mark has been registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse. These circumstances, coupled with the fact that the domain name was registered in August 2019 and resolves to a website appearing to have nothing to do with Complainantï¿½s business, lead the Examiner to conclude that there is insufficient evidence that Respondent had Complainant or its VIOC mark in mind when registering the domain name. Accordingly, the Examiner is not satisfied by clear and convincing evidence that the domain name was registered or is being used in bad faith.

The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it 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:

vioc.icu

	Complainant Submitted: November 6, 2019
	Commencement: November 11, 2019
	Default Date: November 26, 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: Valvoline Licensing and Intellectual Property LLC of Lexington, KY, United States of America
	Complainant Representative: CSC Digital Brand Services of Wilmington, DE, United States of America

	Respondent: Hong Yi Ming / Yi Ming Hong Yi Ming Hong of Guang Dong, II, CN

	Registries: ShortDot SA
	Registrars: CHENGDU WEST DIMENSION DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.

	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.
	Alan L. Limbury, as Examiner