URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
Educational Testing Service (ETS) v. Privacy Protect, LLC (PrivacyProtect.org)
Claim Number: FA2008001908823
DOMAIN NAME
<toeic.store>
PARTIES
Complainant: Educational Testing Service (ETS) of Princeton, NJ, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: Jones Day
Spencer K Beall of Washington, DC, USA
|
Respondent: Domain Admin / Privacy Protect, LLC (PrivacyProtect.org) of Burlington, MA, US | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DotStore Inc. | |
Registrars: PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com |
EXAMINER
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. | |
Ahmet Akguloglu, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: August 18, 2020 | |
Commencement: August 19, 2020 | |
Default Date: September 3, 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"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Procedural Findings: | ||
Multiple Complainants: The Complaint does not allege multiple Complainants. | ||
Multiple Respondents: The Complaint does not allege multiple Respondents. |
Findings of Fact: The Complainant stated that the Complainant is the world’s largest private nonprofit educational testing and assessment organization. The Complainant also asserted that The Complainant has administered the TOEIC test, scores from which are used today by nearly 14,000 organizations in 160 countries. The Complainant further stated that the Complainant also offers TOEIC test preparation products and services worldwide, including on the websites at <ets.org/toeic>, <toeic.com>, <toeic.net> and <toeic.org>. The Complainant claimed that the Complainant owns hundreds of valid trademark registrations worldwide for its famous TOEIC trademark, which is currently in use and registered with the Trademark Clearinghouse. The Complainant stated that the disputed domain <toeic.store> is identical to the Complainant’s trademark. The Complainant further stated that the Respondent holds no legitimate interest in the trademark TOEIC and is not licensed or authorized by Complainant to use the trademark. The Complainant further claimed that the Respondent is using the disputed domain to attract users to its website for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with the trademark and the Complainant’s sponsorship of products offered on the website. The Complainant also claimed that the Respondent is attempting to profit by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark. Based on the above, the Complainant further claims that the Respondent has obtained registration of the disputed domain name in bad faith. The Respondent provided no response to the complaint. |
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: Determined: Finding for Complainant It is clear that the Complainant has met its burden by clear and convincing evidence that the generic term “store†does not serve to distinguish from the Complainant’s trademark but only consolidates the assumption that the disputed domain relates to an authorized service channel, that the domain name is therefore indistinguishably similar to the word mark TOEIC for which the Complainant holds valid and current international registration which is in use. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant The Complainant did not authorize the Respondent for use of the TOEIC trademark. The Respondent did not submit any response or evidence to the contrary that it has legitimate interest for usage of the TOEIC trademark. Therefore, it is understood that the Respondent does not have any right or legitimate interest over the disputed domain name.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant Given the well-known status of the Complainant’s trademark the Respondent was clearly well aware of the Complainant and of their rights on the trademark when they registered the domain name. Besides, the Respondent has proceeded to register and use the domain name in order to attract intentional commercial gain from internet users by way of presenting the similar products and services. Accordingly, the Examiner finds that the Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith. FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD 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:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties 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(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Ahmet Akguloglu Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page