DECISION

 

Closet World, Inc v. Abdul Gafoor M K / cw india / Khaled Shorbaji

Claim Number: FA2502002139255

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Closet World, Inc ("Complainant"), represented by Christopher S. Reeder, California, USA. Respondent is Abdul Gafoor M K / cw india / Khaled Shorbaji ("Respondent"), United Arab Emirates.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES

The domain names at issue are <closetworldme.com> and <closetworld-qatar.com>, registered with FastDomain Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC.

 

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.

 

James Bridgeman SC as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on February 7, 2025; Forum received payment on February 7, 2025.

 

On February 10, 2025, FastDomain Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <closetworldme.com> and <closetworld-qatar.com> domain names are registered with FastDomain Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. FastDomain Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC have verified that Respondent is bound by the FastDomain Inc. and GoDaddy.com, LLC registration agreements 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 20, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 12, 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@closetworldme.com and postmaster@closetworld-qatar.com. Also on February 20, 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 March 13, 2025, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed James Bridgeman SC 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 disputed domain names be cancelled.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

Complainant claims rights in the CLOSET WORLD service mark established by its ownership of the United States registered trademark described below, and use of the mark in its business.

 

Complainant firstly alleges that the disputed domain names, <closetworldme.com> and <closetworld-qatar.com>  are identical to, or at least confusingly similar to the CLOSET WORLD mark and Complainant's corresponding domain name <closetworld.com>.

 

Complainant adds that both Respondent and Complainant advertise custom storage solutions under the name "CLOSET WORLD" it is evident that the disputed domain names are identical, if not at the very least confusingly similar to Complainant's registered trademark.

 

Complainant next alleges that Respondent has no legitimate interest in the disputed domain names, arguing that Policy ¶ 4(c) sets forth that a respondent does not have a legitimate interest in a domain name(s) if:

        "(i) Before any notice…of the dispute, your use of, or demonstrable preparations to sue, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or

        (ii) You (as an individual, business, or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you have acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or

        (iii) You are making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue."

 

Complainant asserts that Respondent has publicly and commonly been using the disputed domain names in connection with custom storage solutions without having any trademark rights to the CLOSET WORLD mark.

 

Further, Complainant argues that as the disputed domain names are being used for business purposes, none of which is associated with Complainant, who is the rightful owner of the CLOSET WORLD trademark, Respondent was not making a fair use of the disputed domain names without any intent for commercial gain. Therefore, Complainant argues Respondent is in violation of all three elements of the Policy Paragraph 4, Section C and, as such, has no legitimate interest in the disputed domain names under Policy Rule 3 (b)(ix).

 

Complainant has exhibited screen captures of the websites to which the disputed domain names resolve in an annex to this Complaint.

 

Complainant asserts that not only do the disputed domain names blatantly rip-off Complainant's CLOSET WORLD trademark, but they are being used for the purpose of selling identical goods and services. Complaint adds that the exhibited screen captures show that on his websites Respondent advertises goods and services for "custom storage solutions" which are identical to the goods and services for which its United States trademark was registered. (See details of the registration below).

 

Complainant contends that in the case at hand, Respondent has unfairly and improperly used the CLOSET WORLD trademark to promote its business for identical goods and services which constitutes a clear violation and infringement of Complainant's trademark rights. Complainant adds that Respondent's infringement is undoubtedly likely to cause confusion or mistake as to the affiliation, connection, association, origin, sponsorship or approval of such goods and services, as well as misrepresent the nature of the goods and services which essentially enables Respondent to freeride on Complainant's significant marketing efforts and expenditures.

 

Finally, Complainant submits that Respondent had constructive notice of Complainant's trademark rights based on Complainant's United States federal trademark registrations.

 

Complainant concludes that Respondent's constructive notice combined with the fact that Respondent sells identical goods and services to that of Complainant illustrates a clear case of willful infringement. Complainant argues that given Respondent's willful infringement, Respondent is clearly in violation of the above section iv, rendering Respondent using the Domain Names in bad faith.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant has provided a copy of the certificate of registration of United States registered trademark CLOSET WORLD, registration number 2,314,468, registered in the Principal Register on February 1, 2000 for services in international classes 37 and 42, which records that it is the registered owner of the mark.

 

The disputed domain name <closetworld-qatar.com> was registered on May 22, 2012. The disputed domain name <closetworldme.com> registered on November 2, 2023. They each resolve to websites that display domestic furniture and household storage solutions.

 

There is no information about Respondent, except for that provided in the Complaint, as amended, the Registrar's WhoIs and the information provided by the Registrar in response to a request by Forum for details of the registration of the disputed domain names for the purposes of this proceeding.

 

 

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 provided uncontested convincing evidence of its rights in the CLOSET WORLD mark established by its ownership of the United States registered service mark described above. The disputed domain name <closetworldme.com> is composed of Complainant's registered trademark in combination with the descriptive word "me" and the generic Top Level Domain ("gTLD") extension <.com>.

 

The disputed domain name <closetworld-qatar.com> is composed of Complainant's mark, a hyphen, and the country name Qatar. In each case the disputed domain names have the generic Top Level Domain ("gTLD") extension <.com>.

 

Complainant's registered trademark is clearly recognizable within the both of disputed domain names the only distinctive element within each.

 

The additional element "me" in the former case is descriptive and in the latter case neither the hyphen nor the geographical place name prevents a finding that either of the respective disputed domain names is confusingly similar to the CLOSET WORLD in which Complainant has rights.

 

In the circumstances of this case the gTLD extension <.com> within each of the disputed domain names may be ignored for the purposes of comparing Complainant's mark and each of the disputed domain names, because it would be considered by Internet users to be a necessary technical element for a domain name registration.

 

This Panel finds therefore that the disputed domain name is identical to the CLOSET WORLD mark in which the Complainant has rights, and Complainant has therefore succeeded in the first element of the test in Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Complainant has made out a prima facie case that the Respondent has no rights legitimate interests in the disputed domain names as set out in Complainant's detailed submissions above.

 

It is well established that once a complainant makes out a prima facie case that a respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name at issue, the burden of production shifts to the respondent to prove its rights or legitimate interests.

 

Respondent has failed to discharge that burden and therefore this Panel must find that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.

 

Complainant has therefore succeeded in the second element of the test in Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

Complainant has shown rights in the disputed domain name dating back to February 1, 2000, when its mark was registered in the United States as shown above.

 

The disputed domain name <closetworldme.com> was registered on November 2, 2023, and the disputed domain name was registered much earlier <closetworld-qatar.com>  on May 22, 2012.

 

The mark CLOSET WORLD is identifiable within each of the disputed domain names, each of which is confusingly similar to Complainant's mark.

 

Complainant has asserted that it uses but has not shown any use the CLOSET WORLD mark. Neither has it produced any evidence of its ownership or use of the domain name <closetworld.com> as it claims.

 

Neither has Complainant shown any evidence that it has any goodwill or reputation in the use of the CLOSET WORLD mark. It may have such evidence, but it has not been provided by Complainant and the Policy provides for an evidence-based procedure, with Complainant bearing the burden of production in each of the required elements set out in Policy ¶ 4(a).

 

The only evidence that Complainant has adduced to support its claim is the certificate of registration of the CLOSET WORLD in the United States and a press-release dated August 1, 2024, which is headed "Closet World arrives in Oman with its new branch in Muscat". The press release proceeds to state that "Closet World, on of the leading providers of custom storage solutions in the UAE, ANONCES THE OPENING OF ITS NEW BRANCH IN Muscat, Oman. This expansion marks a significant milestone as the company extends its reach across the Middle East."

 

The press release dated August 1, 2024, post-dates the registration of the disputed domain names on May 22, 2015, and November 2, 2023, respectively.

 

There is nothing in the record to show that the registrant of either of the disputed domain names had any knowledge of Complaint, or its rights in the CLOSET WORLD mark when the disputed domain name was chosen and registered.

 

As Complainant has not shown that it has any goodwill or reputation in the CLOSET WORLD mark, there is no evidence that the disputed domain was registered in bad faith.

 

This Panel finds therefore that Complainant has failed to prove that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith and because Complainant has failed to establish the third element of the test in Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii), Complainant's application must be refused.

 

Rules 10 and 12 

For completeness, the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") provide at R.12. "Further Statements In addition to the complaint and the response, the Panel may request, in its sole discretion, further statements or documents from either of the Parties."

 

Rules 10 (b) and (c) provide :

        10, General Powers of the Panel

        […]

        (b) In all cases, the Panel shall ensure that the Parties are treated with equality and that each Party is given a fair opportunity to present its case.

 

        (c) The Panel shall ensure that the administrative proceeding takes place with due expedition. It may, at the request of a Party or on its own motion, extend, in exceptional cases, a period of time fixed by  these Rules or by the Panel.

        […]"

 

This Panel has considered whether to exercise the power to request further statements relating to the asserted goodwill of Complainant which is not supported by evidence.

 

However, in the circumstances of this case it has been decided not to issue a Procedural Order for two reasons: firstly, issuing such an order could be construed as directing proofs on one Party and contrary to the Panel's obligations of impartially and Rule 10(b), secondly issuing a Procedural Order would necessitate further rounds of submissions in the interests of fair procedure and would be inappropriate given the Panel's obligation to proceed with expedition pursuant to Rule 10(c).

 

DECISION

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 <closetworldme.com> and <closetworld-qatar.com> domain names REMAIN WITH Respondent.

 

_

 

James Bridgeman SC

Panelist

Dated: March 14, 2025