DECISION

 

Rocket Mortgage, LLC v. Domain Admin / Name Protection Domain

Claim Number: FA2309002063561

PARTIES

Complainant is Rocket Mortgage, LLC ("Complainant"), represented by David K. Caplan of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Domain Admin / Name Protection Domain ("Respondents"), Bahamas/Panama.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES 

The domain names at issue are <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com>, registered with Internet Domain Service BS Corp and Above.com Pty Ltd.

 

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.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on September 26, 2023. Forum received payment on September 26, 2023.

 

On September 28, 2023 and October 10, 2023, Internet Domain Service BS Corp and Above.com Pty Ltd. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names are registered with Internet Domain Service BS Corp and Above.com Pty Ltd. and that Respondents are the current registrants of the names. Internet Domain Service BS Corp and Above.com Pty Ltd. have verified that Respondents are bound by the Internet Domain Service BS Corp and Above.com Pty Ltd. registration agreements and have thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

 

On October 17, 2023, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of November 6, 2023 by which Respondents could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondents' registrations as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@roocketmortgage.com, postmaster@rcoketmortgage.com, postmaster@rcketmortgage.com, postmaster@rockketmortgage.com, postmaster@rocketmortgagr.com. Also on October 17, 2023, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondents of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondents via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondents' registrations as technical, administrative and billing contacts.

 

Having received no response from Respondents, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On November 7, 2023, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury as Panelist.

 

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that 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, Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondents.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondents to Complainant.

 

PRELIMINARY ISSUE: MULTIPLE RESPONDENTS

Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules provides that a "complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder". Paragraph 1(d) of the Forum's Supplemental Rules defines "The Holder of a Domain Name Registration" as "the single person or entity listed in the registration information, as verified by the Registrar, at the time of commencement" and sub-paragraph 1(d)(i) provides that a Complainant wishing to make an argument for a single Respondent having multiple aliases must comply with Supplemental Rules 4(c) and 17(a)(i).

 

Although the names of the registrants remain privacy protected even after Domain Service BS Corp and Above.com Pty Ltd. sent the registrant information to Forum, Complainant has shown that the <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names are effectively controlled by the same person and/or entity, which is operating under several aliases. Hence this decision refers to Domain Admin / Name Protection Domain as "Respondent". 

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

Complainant, Rocket Mortgage, LLC, is a well-known provider of mortgage lending services, with a particularly visible presence online. It has rights in numerous ROCKET-formative marks including ROCKET MORTGAGE and uses the domain name <rocketmortgage.com> in connection with its online lending services.

 

Respondent's <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names are identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's ROCKET MORTGAGE mark.

 

Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names since Respondent is not licensed or authorized to use Complainant's ROCKET MORTGAGE mark. Respondent is not commonly known by the domain names and Respondent's identity is still privacy protected and listed as Domain Admin and Name Protection Domain. Additionally, Respondent does not use the domain names for any bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, Respondent has coded the domain names' resolution to redirect to various parked websites with linked advertisements, competitor websites, or even websites that distribute malware, through which Respondent presumably receives click-through revenue.

 

Respondent registered the <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names in bad faith with actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in the well-known ROCKET MORTGAGE mark and uses them in bad faith for commercial gain in an attempt to benefit from the goodwill and reputation associated with Complainant's mark.

 

Further, Respondent's registration and use of the domain names are a classic example of typosquatting. It is well established that typosquatting alone is evidence of bad faith.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.

 

DISCUSSION

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and 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").

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

Complainant has shown that it has rights in the ROCKET MORTGAGE mark through registration with the USPTO (Reg. No. 5,013,488, registered on August 2, 2016). The Panel finds each of Respondent's <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names to be confusingly similar to Complainant's ROCKET MORTGAGE mark since each is easily recognizable as a misspelling of the mark. The inconsequential ".com" generic top-level domain ("gTLD") may be ignored. See, for example, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, WIPO Case No. D2000-0429.

 

Complainant has established this element.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy sets out three illustrative circumstances as examples which, if established by Respondent, shall demonstrate rights to or legitimate interests in the domain names for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy, i.e.

 

(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.

 

The domain names were registered on the following dates: <rockketmortgage.com> on February 7, 2018; <rcoketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> on February 8, 2018; <rcketmortgage.com> on March 21, 2019; and <roocketmortgage.com> on April 26, 2019. They resolve to competitor sites, advertisement links generating click-through revenue, and malware links.

 

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 <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> 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

Paragraph 4(b) of the Policy sets out four illustrative circumstances, which, though not exclusive, shall be evidence of the registration and use of the domain names in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, including:

 

(iv)                      by using the domain names, 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 ROCKET MORTGAGE mark when Respondent registered the typosquatted <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names and 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 ROCKET MORTGAGE 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 to attract users for commercial gain under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).

 

Complainant has established this element.

 

DECISION

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 <roocketmortgage.com>, <rcoketmortgage.com>, <rcketmortgage.com>, <rockketmortgage.com> and <rocketmortgagr.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

 

Alan L. Limbury, Panelist

Dated: November 9, 2023