Coulter Ventures, LLC d/b/a Rogue Fitness v. Michael Rill
Claim Number: FA2205001998037
Complainant is Coulter Ventures, LLC d/b/a Rogue Fitness (“Complainant”), represented by Janet Lee of Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., US. Respondent is Michael Rill (“Respondent”), US.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <notroguefitness.com>, registered with Squarespace Domains LLC.
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.
Darryl C. Wilson, as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on May 25, 2022; the Forum received payment on May 25, 2022.
On May 27, 2022, Squarespace Domains LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <notroguefitness.com> domain name is registered with Squarespace Domains LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Squarespace Domains LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the Squarespace Domains 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 May 31, 2022, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 20, 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@notroguefitness.com. Also on May 31, 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.
A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on May 31, 2022.
On June 6, 2022, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Darryl C. Wilson 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.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant engages in the business of manufacturing strength and fitness products and services. Complainant asserts rights in the ROGUE FITNESS mark through its registration of the mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g., Reg. No. 3,501,073, registered on September 16, 2008). Respondent’s <notroguefitness.com> domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s ROGUE FITNESS mark as it incorporates the mark in its entirety, only adding the word “not” and the “.com” generic top-level domain (“gTLD”).
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <notroguefitness.com> domain name. Complainant has not authorized or licensed Respondent to use the ROGUE FITNESS mark, nor is Respondent commonly known by the disputed domain. Further, Respondent is not using the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use as the resolving website only redirects users to Complainant’s own website.
Respondent registered and uses the <notroguefitness.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent had actual notice of Complainant’s rights in the ROGUE FITNESS mark. Additionally, the resolving website lacks substantive content, only redirecting to Complainant’s website.
B. Respondent
Respondent submitted a formal, timely response on May 31, 2022, and an accompanying note, in which Respondent consented to the transfer of the <notroguefitness.com> domain name to Complainant. The Panel notes the <notroguefitness.com> domain name was registered on or about January 12, 2022.
Complainant is Coulter Ventures, LLC d/b/a Rogue Fitness (“Complainant”), of Columbus, OH, USA. Complainant is the owner of the domestic registration for the mark ROGUE FITNESS, which it has used continuously since at least as early as 2007 in connection with its provision of weightlifting equipment and personal training services. Complainant has not authorized Respondent to use its mark nor is Respondent known by the disputed domain name or in any way affiliated with Complainant.
Respondent is Michael Rill (“Respondent”), of Plain City, OH, USA. Respondent indicated that he did not want to contest the transfer of the disputed domain from Respondent to Complainant.
PRELIMINARY ISSUE: CONSENT TO TRANSFER
Respondent consents to transfer the <notroguefitness.com> domain name to Complainant. However, after the initiation of this proceeding, Squarespace Domains, LLC placed a hold on Respondent’s account and therefore Respondent cannot transfer the disputed domain name while this proceeding is still pending.
The Panel here finds that in light of the present circumstances, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain name but instead agrees to transfer the domain name in question to Complainant, the Panel will forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the <notroguefitness.com> domain name. See 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 Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat Arb. Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant . . . 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.”).
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.
The Respondent has consented to transfer of the disputed domain name.
The Respondent has consented to transfer of the disputed domain name.
The Respondent has consented to transfer of the disputed domain name.
As the Respondent has chosen not to contest any of the three elements required under the ICANN Policy and has instead consented to transfer the disputed domain name in accordance with Complainant’s requested relief, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <notroguefitness.com> domain name be immediately TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Darryl C. Wilson, Panelist
Dated: June 24, 2022
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page