DECISION

 

American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. Jacob Hauser / Woodsman Studios, LLC

Claim Number: FA2401002079872

 

PARTIES

Complainant is American Honda Motor Co., Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Samantha Markley of Loza & Loza, LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Jacob Hauser / Woodsman Studios, LLC ("Respondent"), North Carolina, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <hondajet.media> ('the Domain Name'), registered with Porkbun LLC.

 

PANEL

The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.

 

Dawn Osborne as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on January 18, 2024; Forum received payment on January 18, 2024.

 

On January 19, 2024, Porkbun LLC confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <hondajet.media> Domain Name is registered with Porkbun LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Porkbun LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the Porkbun 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 January 22, 2024, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 12, 2024 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@hondajet.media. Also on January 22, 2024, 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, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On February 13, 2024 pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Dawn Osborne 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 Respondent.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the Domain Name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

The Complainant's contentions can be summarised as follows:

 

The Complainant owns the trade mark HONDA registered, inter alia, in the USA for land vehicles since 1967. The Complainant also owns the trade mark HONDA JET registered, inter alia, in the USA for aircraft since 2017.

 

The Domain Name registered in 2023 is confusingly similar to the Complainant's HONDA trade mark and identical to the Complainant's HONDA JET mark containing them in their entirety. The addition of the gTLD .media does not distinguish the Domain Name from the Complainant's marks.

 

Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name, is not commonly known by it and is not authorised by the Complainant.

 

The Domain Name does not point to an active site. Passive holding of a domain name containing a well known mark is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate non commercial fair use. It is registration and use in opportunistic bad faith.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

The Complainant owns the trade mark HONDA registered, inter alia, in the USA for land vehicles since 1967. The Complainant also owns the trade mark HONDA JET registered, inter alia, in the USA for aircraft since 2017.

 

The Domain Name registered in 2023 has not been used.

 

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

The Domain Name consists of the Complainant's HONDA JET mark (which is registered, inter alia, in the USA for aircraft since 2017) and the gTLD .media.

 

The gTLD .media does not serve to distinguish the Domain Name from the Complainant's HONDA JET mark, which is the distinctive component of the Domain Name. See Red Hat Inc v Haecke, FA 726010 (Forum July 24, 2006) (concluding that the redhat.org domain name is identical to the complainant's red hat mark because the mere addition of the gTLD was insufficient to differentiate the disputed domain name from the mark).

 

Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Domain Name is identical for the purposes of the Policy to a mark in which the Complainant has rights.

 

As such the Panel holds that Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been satisfied.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant has not authorised the use of its marks. There is no evidence or reason to suggest the Respondent is, in fact, commonly known by the Domain Name. See Alaska Air Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Alaska Airlines v. Song Bin, FA 1574905 (Forum Sept. 17, 2014) (holding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name as demonstrated by the WHOIS information and based on the fact that the complainant had not licensed or authorized the respondent to use its ALASKA AIRLINES mark).

 

There has been no use of the Domain Name. See Hewlett-Packard Co. v Shemesh, FA 434145 (Forum Apr. 20, 2005) (finding that inactive use is not a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy 4(c)(i)).

 

The Respondent has not answered this Complaint or rebutted the prima facie case evidenced by the Complainant as set out herein.

 

As such the Panelist finds that the Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name and that the Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy.

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

The overriding objective of the Policy is to curb the abusive registration of domain names in circumstances where the registrant seeks to profit from or exploit the trade mark of another. The Respondent is passively holding the Domain Name containing the Complainant's well known HONDA mark and reflecting the Complainant's more recent mark HONDA JET. The arbitrary nature of the HONDA JET mark as reproduced exactly in the Domain Name makes it more likely than not that the Complainant was aware of the Complainant, its business, products and rights at the time of registration of the Domain Name. Passive holding of a domain name containing a well known mark such as HONDA without legitimate excuse is bad faith registration and use. See Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows, D2000-0003 (WIPO Feb. 18, 2000).

 

As such, the Panel holds that the Complainant has made out its case that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith and has satisfied the third limb of the Policy.

 

DECISION

Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <hondajet.media> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

Dawn Osborne, Panelist

Dated: February 13, 2024