URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

 

Royalty Bugaboo GmbH v. REDACTED FOR PRIVACY

Claim Number: FA2111001972421

 

DOMAIN NAME

<bugaboo.vip>

 

PARTIES

Complainant:  Royalty Bugaboo GmbH of Zug, Unknown, Switzerland.

Complainant Representative: 

Complainant Representative: Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu, P.C. of New York, New York, United States of America.

 

Respondent:  Withheld for Privacy Purposes of Reykjavik, Capital Region, International, IS.

Respondent Representative:  «cFirstName» «cMiddle» «cLastName»

 

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

Registries:  Minds + Machines Group Limited

Registrars:  NameCheap, Inc.

 

EXAMINER

The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.

 

James Bridgeman, as Examiner.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted: November 8, 2021

Commencement: November 12, 2021   

Default Date: November 30, 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

The Complainant owns and uses the BUGABOO trademark for which it owns a portfolio of registrations for an including the BUGABOO mark,  many of which are figurative and design marks, including the following United States service mark registration BUGABOO, registration number 4883527, registered on the Principal Register on January 12, 2016 and corrected on July 17, 2018 for goods in international class 35.

 

The disputed domain name <bugaboo.vip> resolves to a website at https://www.gotrax.store/ which offers goods unrelated to the Complainant.

 

There is no information available about the Respondent, except for that provided in the Complaint, the Registrar’s WhoIs and the information provided by the Registrar in response to the request by the FORUM for details of the registration of the disputed domain name. The Respondent remains unidentified.

 

The date of registration of the disputed domain name is not provided.

 

Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires a 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:

 

 

1. The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark [URS Procedure ¶ 1.2.6.1]:

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 [URS Procedure ¶ 1.2.6.2]

3. [if URS] The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith [URS Procedure ¶ 1.2.6.3]

 

There is no evidence in the record of the date on which the disputed domain name was registered. URS Procedure ¶ 1.2..6.3 and URS Procedure ¶8.1.3 requires that a complainant must prove that the disputed domain name was both registered and is being used in bad faith.

 

It is not possible for this Examiner to determine whether the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith without giving consideration to the date of registration of the disputed domain name.

 

As the URS Procedure ¶ 8.2 imposes a very high standard of proof viz. clear and convincing evidence of each element of the tests in URS Procedure  ¶ 1.2..6.3 and URS Policy ¶ 8.1.3, this Examiner must find that the evidence on record does not reach the requisite standard to prove that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith.

 

 

 

DETERMINATION

 

After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that

the Complainant has NOT demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain names be RETURNED to the control of Respondent:

<bugaboo.vip>.

 

URS Policy ¶8.6, this determination is without prejudice to the Complainant to proceed with an action in court of competent jurisdiction or under the UDRP.

 

 

 

 

James Bridgeman, Examiner

Dated:  December 1, 2021

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page