URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


DR. SEUSS ENTERPRISES, L.P. v. WhoisGuard, Inc.
Claim Number: FA2101001927110


DOMAIN NAME

<whoville.town>


PARTIES


   Complainant: DR. SEUSS ENTERPRISES, L.P. of San Diego, CA, United States of America
  
Complainant Representative: DLA Piper LLP Eugenia Schontag of Washington, DC, United States of America

   Respondent: WhoisGuard Protected / WhoisGuard, Inc. of Panama Panama, Panama, PA
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS


   Registries: Binky Moon, LLC
   Registrars: NameCheap, Inc.

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.
   Dawn Osborne, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY


   Complainant Submitted: January 4, 2021
   Commencement: January 6, 2021
   Default Date: January 21, 2021
   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



   Findings of Fact: The Complainant is the owner of the mark WHOVILLE registered, inter alia, in the USA since 2013 for clothing. The Domain Name has been used for commercial pay per click links.

  

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.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The Domain Name consists of the Complainant’s mark and the gTLD .town and so is identical to the Complainant’s mark for the purposes of the Policy.


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

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The Respondent is in default, does not appear to have any rights or legitimate interests in the name, is not commonly known by the Domain Name or authorised by the Complainant having used the Domain Name for commercial pay per click links.


[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.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The use for pay per click links is disruptive and attempts to attract Internet users for commercial gain in a confusing manner.


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:


  1. The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods. 

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:

  1. whoville.town

 

Dawn Osborne
Examiner
Dated: January 21, 2021

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page