DECISION

 

Grand Complications N.V. v. ong lai huat

Claim Number: FA2501002137959

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Grand Complications N.V. ("Complainant"), represented by Christiana Georgiou of Grand Complications N.V., Cyprus. Respondent is ong lai huat ("Respondent"), Malaysia.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES 

The domain names at issue are <gb88me.com> and <gimsbet.com>, 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.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on January 31, 2025. Forum received payment on January 31, 2025.

 

On January 31, 2025, Namecheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <gb88me.com> and <gimsbet.com> 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 February 3, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 24, 2025 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@gb88me.com and postmaster@gimsbet.com. Also on February 3, 2025, 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 25, 2025, 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 Respondent.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

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

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant (virtually word for word):

Complainant, Grand Complications N.V., holds valid trademark rights in the mark "GemBet", registered with the Bureau of Intellectual Property of Curaçao and the UK Intellectual Property Office. The <gb88me.com> and <gimsbet.com> domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant's mark. The addition of the geographical indicator or other symbols such as "gb", "88" and misspelling does not sufficiently differentiate the domain names from Complainant's mark, which remains the distinctive element.

 

Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain names. Complainant has not authorized or licensed Respondent to use its mark. Upon information and belief, Respondent is not commonly known by the domain names and is using them solely for the purpose of diverting traffic and trading on the goodwill associated with Complainant's mark.

 

Respondent's registration and use of the domain names constitute bad faith under the UDRP. The domain names are being used to create a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark, suggesting a non-existent association with or endorsement by Complainant. The domain names redirect to a website that mimics the appearance and content style of Complainant's legitimate site, misleading users into believing that the infringing sites are affiliated with or endorsed by Complainant. Evidence of this bad faith use is attached as Exhibit A, which includes screenshots of some of the pages of the infringing site, demonstrating their similarity to Complainant's own website.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant has failed to establish 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 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 the domain name should be cancelled or transferred:

 

(i)        the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and

(ii)        Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(iii) 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 as 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 "GemBet" mark through registrations with the Bureau for Intellectual Property of Curaçao (Reg. No. 21020, registered on April 18, 2024, with effect from April 8, 2024, for inter alia: Game services; gambling services; casino services; online gambling services; online casino services; game services provided online from a computer network, in Class 41) and with the UK Intellectual Property Office (Reg. No. UK00004045458, registered on July 19, 2024, with effect from April 29, 2024, for inter alia: Provision of betting, gambling and gaming services through physical and electronic sites and telephonic centers, in Class 41).

 

It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. The standing (or threshold) test for confusing similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightforward comparison between the Complainant's trademark and the disputed domain name. WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition ("WIPO Overview 3.0 "), section 1.7.

 

The Panel finds neither of Respondent's <gb88me.com> and <gimsbet.com> domain names to be identical nor confusingly similar to Complainant's "GemBet" mark.  The inconsequential ".com" generic top-level domain ("gTLD") may be ignored under this element. See, for example, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, WIPO Case No. D2000-0429.

 

The Panel does not accept Complainant's submission that "the addition of the geographical indicator or other symbols such as "gb", "88" and misspelling does not sufficiently differentiate the domain names from Complainant's mark, which remains the distinctive element". The Panel finds that neither of the words "Gem" nor "Bet" is an element of the <gb88me.com> domain name. Although the <gimsbet.com> domain name contains the word "bet", that word alone is not the distinctive element of the "GemBet" mark and "gims" is not an obvious misspelling of "Gem".

 

Complainant has failed to establish this element.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests and Registration and Use in Bad Faith

In light of Complainant's failure to establish the first element, the Panel considers it unnecessary to address these elements, other than to note  that Complainant provided no evidence of the content of its own website.

 

DECISION

Complainant having not established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be DENIED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <gb88me.com> and <gimsbet.com> domain names REMAIN WITH Respondent.

 

 

 

Alan L. Limbury, Panelist

Dated: February 26, 2025