Citadel Enterprise Americas LLC and its related entity CE TM Holdings LLC v. Jacky Chan
Claim Number: FA2101001927542
Complainant is Citadel Enterprise Americas LLC and its related entity CE TM Holdings LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Laura M. Franco of Winston & Strawn LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Jacky Chan (“Respondent”), Hong Kong.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <fx-citadel.trade>, registered with NameCheap, 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 Panelist in this proceeding.
Richard Hill as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on January 7, 2021; the Forum received payment on January 7, 2021.
On January 8, 2021, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <fx-citadel.trade> domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameCheap, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc. registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On January 11, 2021, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 1, 2021 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@fx-citadel.trade. Also on January 11, 2021, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
Having received no response from Respondent, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. Respondent did however send an email to the Forum, see below.
On February 5, 2021, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Richard Hill as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant states that it was founded in 1990 and has since grown to be one of the world’s largest and most sophisticated alternative investment institutions. Complainant is widely regarded as an industry expert and leader, and its opinions on all forms of financial markets, financial services, and investment vehicles are highly regarded. Complainant employs more than 1,250 professionals who are located in offices worldwide and it manages many billions of U.S. dollars in assets. Its investors include endowments, pension funds, foundations and other institutional investors, as well as high net worth individuals. Complainant is also a leading market maker, providing liquidity and trade execution to retail and institutional clients, and it is a leader in investment management technology. Complainant has rights in the CITADEL mark through its registration in the United States in 2004. The mark is registered elsewhere around the world, including in China and Hong Kong.
Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its CITADEL mark as it fully incorporates the mark, merely adding the descriptive term “FX,” an acronym for the phrase “foreign exchange,” and the generic top-level domain (gTLD) “.trade.”
According to Complainant, Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name nor has Respondent been authorized by Complainant to use the CITADEL mark. Respondent has not used the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services as Respondent uses it to pass off as Complainant: the resolving website that not only fraudulently purports to be Complainant but also has copied many aspects of Complainant’s authentic website, such as the names and photographs of Complainant’s senior management team, office locations, Complainant’s logo, and text that appears on the authentic website.
Further, says Complainant, Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the disputed domain name to pass off as Complainant. Additionally, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights to the CITADEL mark prior to registering the disputed domain name as Respondent passes off as Complainant.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. In its email of January 13, 2021 to the Forum Respondent states: “The domain will be shut down and the website will be removed, all we ask for is 2 weeks to be able to do that.”
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not make any findings of fact.
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."
The Panel interprets Respondent’s email as consent to transfer the disputed domain name. Thus, the Panel finds that the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant. In accordance with a general legal principle governing arbitrations as well as national court proceedings, this Panel holds that it cannot act nec ultra petita nec infra petita, that is, that it cannot issue a decision that would be either less than requested, nor more than requested by the parties. Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.
See Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Forum Jan. 13, 2004); see also Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.”).
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not analyze this element of the Policy.
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not analyze this element of the Policy.
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not analyze this element of the Policy.
Given the common request of the Parties, it is Ordered that the <fx-citadel.trade> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Richard Hill, Panelist
Dated: February 8, 2021
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page