BNP PARIBAS v. WhoisGuard, Inc.
Claim Number: FA2002001882695
Complainant: BNP PARIBAS of PARIS 09, France.
Complainant Representative: Laurent Becker, Nameshield of Angers, France.
Respondent: WhoisGuard, Inc. / WhoisGuard Protected of Panama, International, PA.
Respondent Representative:
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registrar: Donuts, Inc.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
Charles A. Kuechenmeister, Examiner.
Complainant submitted: February 11, 2020
Commencement: February 11, 2020
Default Date: February 26, 2020
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.
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 suspending a domain name:
· the registered domain name is 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 currently in effect and that was in effect at the time the URS Complaint was filed; and
· Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name; and
· the domain was registered and is being used in bad faith.
The Examiner finds as follows:
The International trademark BNP PARIBAS was registered to Complainant (Registration No. 728598) on February 23, 2000 (WIPO Certificate submitted with Complaint). Complainant is currently using that mark in connection with its business operations (Proof of Use screenshot submitted with Complaint). Complainant thus holds a valid national registration of its mark, and the mark is in current use. Further, the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark.
The registrar lists the Registrant as “WhoisGuard Protected / WhoisGuard, Inc.” Neither of these names bears any resemblance to the domain name, and there is no evidence that the Registrant has been commonly known by the domain name. The web site resolving from the domain name is inactive (URS Site Screenshot submitted with the Complaint). Respondent could make no use of the domain name which does not infringe Complainant’s intellectual property rights in the BNP PARIBAS mark. Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
Complainant’s BNP PARIBAS mark represents one of the most famous banks in the world. Registrant incorporated that mark verbatim into the domain name, which demonstrates that it knew of Complainant and its rights in that mark when it registered the domain name. Further, as noted above, the web site resolving from the domain name is inactive. For the foregoing reasons, the Examiner finds that the Registrant registered and is using the domain name in bad faith.
After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.
Charles A. Kuechenmeister, Examiner
Dated: February 27, 2020
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page