Coupang Corporation v. Zheng Jun Jiang
Claim Number: FA2109001963447
Complainant is Coupang Corporation (“Complainant”), represented by Jonathan Uffelman of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, District of Columbia, USA. Respondent is Zheng Jun Jiang (“Respondent”), China.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <coupang110111.com>, <coupang111.com>, <coupang111111.com>, <coupang222.com>, <coupang222111.com>, <coupang2222.com>, <coupang22222.com>, <coupang222222.com>, <coupang333.com>, <coupang3333.com>, <coupang33333.com>, <coupang333333.com>, <coupang55.com>, <coupang555.com>, <coupang5555.com>, <coupang55555.com>, <coupang555555.com>, <coupang66.com>, <coupang6666.com>, <coupang66666.com>, <coupang666666.com>, <coupang688.com>, <coupang777.com>, <coupang7777.com>, <coupang77777.com>, <coupang777777.com>, <coupang88.com>, <coupang886.com>, <coupang888.com>, <coupang888111.com>, <coupang8888.com>, <coupang88888.com>, <coupang888888.com>, <coupang99.com>, <coupang999.com>, <coupang9999.com>, <coupang99999.com>, and <coupang999999.com> (the ”disputed domain names”), registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.
The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
Sandra J. Franklin as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on September 13, 2021; the Forum received payment on September 13, 2021.
On September 14, 2021, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <coupang110111.com>, <coupang111.com>, <coupang111111.com>, <coupang222.com>, <coupang222111.com>, <coupang2222.com>, <coupang22222.com>, <coupang222222.com>, <coupang333.com>, <coupang3333.com>, <coupang33333.com>, <coupang333333.com>, <coupang55.com>, <coupang555.com>, <coupang5555.com>, <coupang55555.com>, <coupang555555.com>, <coupang66.com>, <coupang6666.com>, <coupang66666.com>, <coupang666666.com>, <coupang688.com>, <coupang777.com>, <coupang7777.com>, <coupang77777.com>, <coupang777777.com>, <coupang88.com>, <coupang886.com>, <coupang888.com>, <coupang888111.com>, <coupang8888.com>, <coupang88888.com>, <coupang888888.com>, <coupang99.com>, <coupang999.com>, <coupang9999.com>, <coupang99999.com>, and <coupang999999.com> domain names are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC 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 September 15, 2021, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of October 5, 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@coupang110111.com, postmaster@coupang111.com, postmaster@coupang111111.com, postmaster@coupang222.com, postmaster@coupang222111.com, postmaster@coupang2222.com, postmaster@coupang22222.com, postmaster@coupang222222.com, postmaster@coupang333.com, postmaster@coupang3333.com, postmaster@coupang33333.com, postmaster@coupang333333.com, postmaster@coupang55.com, postmaster@coupang555.com, postmaster@coupang5555.com, postmaster@coupang55555.com, postmaster@coupang555555.com, postmaster@coupang66.com, postmaster@coupang6666.com, postmaster@coupang66666.com, postmaster@coupang666666.com, postmaster@coupang688.com, postmaster@coupang777.com, postmaster@coupang7777.com, postmaster@coupang77777.com, postmaster@coupang777777.com, postmaster@coupang88.com, postmaster@coupang886.com, postmaster@coupang888.com, postmaster@coupang888111.com, postmaster@coupang8888.com, postmaster@coupang88888.com, postmaster@coupang888888.com, postmaster@coupang99.com, postmaster@coupang999.com, postmaster@coupang9999.com, postmaster@coupang99999.com, postmaster@coupang999999.com. Also on September 15, 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.
On October 6, 2021, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Sandra J. Franklin, 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 names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
1. Respondent’s disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s COUPANG mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names.
3. Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain names in bad faith.
B. Respondent did not file a Response.
Complainant, Coupang Corporation, is an online retail shopping company, and holds a registration for the COUPANG mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (Reg. No. 5,173,689, registered Apr. 4, 2017).
Respondent registered the disputed domain names between July 20, 2021, and August 31, 2021, and uses them to redirect Internet traffic to its related webpages.
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."
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.
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) (“Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint”).
The Panel finds that Complainant has rights in the COUPANG mark based upon registration with the USPTO. See DIRECTV, LLC v. The Pearline Group, FA 1818749 (Forum Dec. 30, 2018) (“Complainant’s ownership of a USPTO registration for DIRECTV demonstrate its rights in such mark for the purposes of Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).”).
Respondent’s disputed domain names use Complainant’s COUPANG mark and simply add a string of numbers and the “.com” gTLD. Adding numbers and a gTLD is insufficient to distinguish a domain name from the mark it incorporates under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Am. Online Inc. v. Chinese ICQ Network, D2000-0808 (WIPO Aug. 31, 2000) (finding that the addition of the numeral 4 in the domain name <4icq.com> does nothing to deflect the impact on the viewer of the mark ICQ and is therefore confusingly similar). The Panel finds that Respondent’s disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s COUPANG mark.
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Once Complainant makes a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), the burden shifts to Respondent to show it does have rights or legitimate interests. See Advanced International Marketing Corporation v. AA-1 Corp, FA 780200 (Forum Nov. 2, 2011) (finding that a complainant must offer some evidence to make its prima facie case and satisfy Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii)); see also Neal & Massey Holdings Limited v. Gregory Ricks, FA 1549327 (Forum Apr. 12, 2014) (“Under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), Complainant must first make out a prima facie case showing that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in respect of an at-issue domain name and then the burden, in effect, shifts to Respondent to come forward with evidence of its rights or legitimate interests”).
Complainant argues that Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names because Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names and is not authorized to use Complainant’s COUPANG mark. The WHOIS information of record notes “Zheng Jun Jiang” as the registrant of the disputed domain names. Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names, and thus has no rights under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See H-D U.S.A., LLC, v. ilyas Aslan / uok / Domain Admin ContactID 5645550 / FBS INC / Whoisprotection biz, FA 1785313 (Forum June 25, 2018) (“The publicly available WHOIS information identifies Respondent as ‘Ilyas Aslan’ and so there is no prima facie evidence that Respondent might be commonly known by either of the [<harleybot.bid> and <harleybot.com>] domain names.”); see also Navistar International Corporation v. N Rahmany, FA1505001620789 (Forum June 8, 2015) (finding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name where the complainant had never authorized the respondent to incorporate its NAVISTAR mark in any domain name registration).
Complainant also argues that Respondent does not use the disputed domain names for a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use, as it redirects Internet traffic to its own related webpages. Using a disputed domain name to redirect Internet traffic to a respondent’s webpage is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). See Bank of Am. Corp. v. Nw. Free Cmty. Access, FA 180704 (Forum Sept. 30, 2003) (“Respondent's demonstrated intent to divert Internet users seeking Complainant's website to a website of Respondent and for Respondent's benefit is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) and it is not a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).”); see also Vanguard Trademark Holdings USA LLC v. Dan Stanley Saturne, FA 1785085 (Forum June 8, 2018) (“Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name does not amount to a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use” where “Respondent is apparently using the disputed domain name to offer for sale competing services.”). Complainant provides screenshots of the webpages at the disputed domain names, all of which display Complainant’s logo at the top of the page and offer online shopping. The Panel finds that this is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use, and thus Respondent has no rights under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
Complainant contends that Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain names in bad faith by registering numerous domain names incorporating the COUPANG mark. Bad faith may be found under Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii) where a respondent registers multiple domain names incorporating a complainant’s mark, showing a pattern of bad faith. See Microsoft Corporation and Skype v. zhong biao zhang / Unknown company / zhong zhang, FA1401001538218 (Forum Feb. 20, 2014) (holding that the respondent’s registration of three domain names incorporating variants of the complainant’s SKYPE mark reflected a pattern of bad faith registration under Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii)). Respondent registered thirty-eight domain names that target Complainant’s COUPANG mark. The Panel therefore finds bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii).
Complainant also argues that Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain names in bad faith since Respondent also uses them to attract Internet users to its websites for commercial gain. Using a disputed domain to trade off a complainant’s goodwill and attract Internet traffic for commercial gain evinces bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Allianz of Am. Corp. v. Bond, FA 680624 (Forum June 2, 2006) (finding bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) where the respondent was diverting Internet users searching for the complainant to its own website and likely profiting); see also Target Brands, Inc. v. JK Internet Servs., FA 349108 (Forum Dec. 14, 2004) (finding bad faith because the respondent not only registered Complainant’s famous TARGET mark, but “reproduced . . . Complainant’s TARGET mark . . . [and] added Complainant’s distinctive red bull’s eye [at the domain name] . . . to a point of being indistinguishable from the original.”). Accordingly, the Panel finds bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).
Complainant also claims that Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the COUPANG mark when it registered the disputed domain names, stating that it is evident from the uniqueness and fame of the COUPANG mark and the fact that Respondent uses Complainant’s logo on the resolving websites. The Panel and finds bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See United States Postal Service v. Yongkun Wang, FA 1788170 (Forum July 11, 2018) (finding Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the USPS mark “given the widespread use of Complainant’s mark and the fact that Respondent registered four separate domain names all of which include Complainant’s USPS mark in its entirety”); see also iFinex Inc. v. xu shuaiwei, FA 1760249 (Forum Jan. 1, 2018) (“Respondent’s prior knowledge is evident from the notoriety of Complainant’s BITFINEX trademark as well as from Respondent’s use of its trademark laden domain name to direct internet traffic to a website which is a direct competitor of Complainant”).
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <coupang110111.com>, <coupang111.com>, <coupang111111.com>, <coupang222.com>, <coupang222111.com>, <coupang2222.com>, <coupang22222.com>, <coupang222222.com>, <coupang333.com>, <coupang3333.com>, <coupang33333.com>, <coupang333333.com>, <coupang55.com>, <coupang555.com>, <coupang5555.com>, <coupang55555.com>, <coupang555555.com>, <coupang66.com>, <coupang6666.com>, <coupang66666.com>, <coupang666666.com>, <coupang688.com>, <coupang777.com>, <coupang7777.com>, <coupang77777.com>, <coupang777777.com>, <coupang88.com>, <coupang886.com>, <coupang888.com>, <coupang888111.com>, <coupang8888.com>, <coupang88888.com>, <coupang888888.com>, <coupang99.com>, <coupang999.com>, <coupang9999.com>, <coupang99999.com>, and <coupang999999.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Sandra J. Franklin, Panelist
Dated: October 8, 2021
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page