Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC v. urban fashion225
Claim Number: FA2204001992118
Complainant is Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Lian Ernette of Holland & Hart LLP, Colorado, USA. Respondent is urban fashion225 (“Respondent”), India.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life>, registered with NameCheap, Inc.
PANEL
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.
Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on April 12, 2022. The Forum received payment on April 12, 2022.
On April 13, 2022, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names are registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. 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 April 14, 2022, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of May 4, 2022 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@panoramacharter.biz, postmaster@panoramacharter.life. Also on April 14, 2022, 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 May 12, 2022, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury 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
Complainant, Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC, is a telecommunications company providing services to over 26 million customers in the United States. Complainant has registered the CHARTER mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names are identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s CHARTER mark.
Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names because Respondent is not commonly known by the domain names nor has Respondent been authorized to use Complainant’s CHARTER mark. Respondent is not using the domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services nor for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use because Respondent’s websites pass off Respondent as if it were affiliated with Complainant. Complainant operates a website at “www.charter.com” and its employees use the sub-domain <panorama.charter.com> to login to Complainant’s intranet.
Respondent registered and uses the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names in bad faith because Respondent’s website purports to be an information site for Complainant thereby passing itself off as Complainant and causing confusion amongst users. Respondent acted with actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the CHARTER mark.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.
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”).
Complainant has shown that it has rights in the CHARTER mark through numerous registrations with the USPTO, e.g, Reg. No. 3,899,216, registered on January 4, 2011. The Panel finds Respondent’s <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s CHARTER mark because each incorporates Complainant’s mark while adding the descriptive term “panorama”, which does nothing to distinguish the domain name from the mark. The inconsequential “.biz” and “.life” generic top-level domains (gTLDs) may be ignored.
Complainant has established this element.
(i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain names or names corresponding to the domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain names, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain names, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
Both the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names were registered on July 12, 2021, many years after Complainant registered its CHARTER mark. Each resolves to a website headed “Panorama Charter Employee Login Portal” with the look and feel of Complainant’s <panorama.charter.com> login portal and which invite users to login to Complainant’s intranet. A disclaimer of association with Complainant appears in very fine print at the foot of the third page of the <panoramacharter.biz> home page and, in the Panel’s view, is highly unlikely to dispel the prominent association of that website with that of Complainant.
These circumstances, together with Complainant’s assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names. See Neal & Massey Holdings Limited v. Gregory Ricks, FA 1549327 (Forum Apr. 12, 2014). Respondent has made no attempt to do so.
The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names.
Complainant has established this element.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
(iii) Respondent has registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
(iv) by using the domain name, Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent’s website or location or of a product or service on its website or location.
The circumstances set out above in relation to the second element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant’s CHARTER mark when Respondent registered the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names and did so primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor. Further, that Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent’s websites, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark as to the source of Respondent’s websites and of the services promoted on those websites. This demonstrates registration and use in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii) and (iv).
Complainant has established this element.
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <panoramacharter.biz> and <panoramacharter.life> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Alan L. Limbury, Panelist
Dated: May 13, 2022
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page