The Timken Company v. SPED MALAGA EDWARD, MALAGA RENATA SP. J.
Claim Number: FA2108001958195
Complainant: The Timken Company of North Canton, Ohio, United States of America.
Complainant Representative:
Respondent: REDACTED FOR PRIVACY / SPED MALAGA EDWARD, MALAGA RENATA SP. J. of REDACTED FOR PRIVACY, International, PL.
Respondent Representative: «cFirstName» «cMiddle» «cLastName»
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: MédiaBC
Registrars: OVH sas
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.
Eleni Lappa, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: August 5, 2021
Commencement: August 9, 2021
Default Date: August 24, 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") .
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
Complainant is the owner of numerous trademark registrations worldwide that consist of or contain the TIMKEN trademark, including US registration numbers 517520, 527512, 536733, 1275768, 2638150, 2758212, 2951161, and 4000354, International registration numbers 1049591 and 1022481 and China registration numbers 97308, 10675167 and 6354143, and enjoys a widespread reputation in the world. The disputed domain name is identical to the TIMKEN trademark owned by Complainant. Respondent is not affiliated with Complainant in any way and has no legitimate right or interest to the disputed domain name.
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.
In particular, the Examiner finds that the following 3 requirements are satisfied in the matter at hand:
1. The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use
2. Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name
3. The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith such as: The domain name(s) was/were registered or are being used in bad faith such as: By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s web site or other online location, by creating a likelihood of
confusion with the complainant’s trademark 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.
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 names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.
The Examiner further finds the Complaint was brought in an abuse of the administrative proceeding or with material falsehoods as explained above. Complainant is reminded of URS Procedure 11 when making future filings.
Eleni Lappa, Examiner
Dated: August 27, 2021
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page