DECISION

 

A Place for Mom, Inc. v. Jason Williams

Claim Number: FA2502002140354

 

PARTIES

Complainant is A Place for Mom, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Ashly I. Boesche of Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson LLP, Illinois, USA. Respondent is Jason Williams ("Respondent"), Pennsylvania, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <lookingforaplaceformom.com> ("Domain Name"), registered with GoDaddy.com, 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.

 

Nicholas J.T. Smith as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on February 16, 2025; Forum received payment on February 16, 2025.

 

On February 17, 2025, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <lookingforaplaceformom.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, 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 February 19, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 11, 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@lookingforaplaceformom.com. Also on February 19, 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 formal response from Respondent, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On March 12, 2023, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Nicholas J.T. Smith 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 formal response from Respondent.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

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

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

Since 2000, Complainant has, under the A PLACE FOR MOM mark, provided a variety of consulting and referral services to families in search of senior care options in the United States. Complainant asserts rights in the A PLACE FOR MOM mark based upon registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") (e.g., Reg. No. 2,941,714, registered April 19, 2005). Respondent's <lookingforaplaceformom.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's A PLACE FOR MOM mark because it wholly incorporates Complainant's mark and adds the generic terms "looking for" and the generic top-level domain ("gTLD") ".com" to form the Domain Name.

 

Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the <lookingforaplaceformom.com> domain name. Respondent is not licensed or authorized to use Complainant's A PLACE FOR MOM mark and is not commonly known by the Domain Name. Respondent also does not use the Domain Name for any bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Instead, Respondent uses the Domain Name to purport to offer competing services at the Domain Name's resolving webpage ("Respondent's Website").

 

Respondent registered and uses the <lookingforaplaceformom.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent is attempting to attract Internet users to its website for commercial gain by passing itself off as Complainant or associated with Complainant through the use of a similar domain name and trademark. Furthermore, given Complainant's longstanding use and considerable reputation in the A PLACE FOR MOM mark, Respondent likely had actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in the A PLACE FOR MOM mark prior to registering the Domain Name.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a formal Response in this proceeding.

 

On February 21, 2025, Forum received an email from Respondent stating:

 

Good day !

I have zero interest in any of this.

Court, panel members etc.

I just thought it was a clever name.

How do we stop all of this?

 

FINDINGS

Complainant holds trademark rights for the A PLACE FOR MOM mark. The Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant's A PLACE FOR MOM mark. Complainant has established that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name and that Respondent registered and has used the Domain Name in bad faith.

 

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 asserts rights in the A PLACE FOR MOM mark through its registration of the mark with the USPTO (e.g., Reg. No. 2,941,714, registered April 19, 2005). Registration with the USPTO can sufficiently establish rights in a mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Thermo Electron Corp. v. Xu, FA 713851 (Forum July 12, 2006) (finding that the complainants had established rights in marks where the marks were registered with a national trademark authority).

 

The Panel finds that the <lookingforaplaceformom.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's A PLACE FOR MOM mark because it wholly incorporates Complainant's A PLACE FOR MOM mark and adds the generic terms "looking for" and the gTLD ".com". Adding a generic term or terms and a gTLD to a mark fails to sufficiently distinguish a disputed domain name from a mark per Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Dell Inc. v. pushpender chauhan, FA 1784548 (Forum June 11, 2018) ("Respondent merely adds the term 'supports' and a '.org' gTLD to the DELL mark. Thus, the Panel finds Respondent's disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's DELL mark per Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).").

 

The Panel finds Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Complainant alleges that Respondent holds no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name. In order for Complainant to succeed under this element, it must first make a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the Domain Name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), and then the burden shifts to Respondent to show it does have rights or legitimate interests. See Hanna-Barbera Prods., Inc. v. Entm't Commentaries, FA 741828 (Forum Aug. 18, 2006) and AOL LLC v. Gerberg, FA 780200 (Forum Sept. 25, 2006) ("Complainant must first make a prima facie showing that Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interest in the subject domain names, which burden is light. If Complainant satisfies its burden, then the burden shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the subject domain names."). The Panel holds that Complainant has made out a prima facie case.

 

Complainant asserts that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name as Respondent is not commonly known by the Domain Name, nor has Complainant authorized Respondent to use the A PLACE FOR MOM mark. Respondent has no relationship, affiliation, connection, endorsement or association with Complainant. WHOIS information can help support a finding that a respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, especially where a privacy service has been engaged. See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Dale Anderson, FA1504001613011 (Forum May 21, 2015) (concluding that because the WHOIS record lists "Dale Anderson" as the registrant of the disputed domain name, the respondent was not commonly known by the <statefarmforum.com> domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii)); see also Kohler Co. v. Privacy Service, FA1505001621573 (Forum July 2, 2015) (holding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) where "Privacy Service" was listed as the registrant of the disputed domain name). The WHOIS lists "Jason Williams" as registrant of record. Coupled with Complainant's unrebutted assertions as to absence of any affiliation or authorization between the parties, the Panel finds that Respondent is not commonly known by the Domain Name in accordance with Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).

 

The Domain Name redirects to the Respondent's Website where Respondent (who is based in the United States) purports to offer services to families looking for senior care accommodation, in direct competition with Complainant, whose A PLACE FOR MOM mark is registered for these services in the United States. The Panel also notes that there is evidence that the Respondent's Website is fraudulent or incomplete as there are no contact details on the website nor is there any evidence of a legitimate entity (including the named Respondent) operating the Respondent's Website and providing the services that the Respondent's Website purports to provide. The use of a confusingly similar domain name to redirect to a purportedly competing website does not amount to a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the name under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). See General Motors LLC v. MIKE LEE, FA 1659965 (Forum Mar. 10, 2016) (finding that "use of a domain to sell products and/or services that compete directly with a complainant's business does not constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii)."). See also Dell Inc. v. Devesh Tyagi, FA 1785301 (Forum June 2, 2018) ("Respondent replicates Complainant's website and displays Complainant's products. The Panel finds that this use is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) & (iii).").

 

The Panel finds Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

The Panel finds that, at the time of registration of the Domain Name, December 28, 2024, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's A PLACE FOR MOM mark since the Complainant is a well-known entity in its field having used its mark for over 20 years and the Respondent's Website purports to offer services in direct competition with Complainant. Furthermore, there is no obvious explanation, nor has Respondent provided support for its e-mailed explanation, for an entity to register a domain name that incorporates the A PLACE FOR MOM mark, and use it to redirect visitors to a website purporting to offer consulting services for family members seeking senior care options other than to take advantage of Complainant's reputation in the A PLACE FOR MOM Mark which it has developed over 20 years of use. In the absence of rights or legitimate interests of its own this demonstrates registration in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).

 

The Panel finds that Respondent registered and uses the Domain Name in bad faith as Respondent uses the Domain Name to redirect Internet users to Respondent's own website where Respondent purports to offer services in direct competition with Complainant. Using a confusingly similar domain name to divert Internet users to a respondent's competing website can show bad faith registration and use per Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii). See ZIH Corp. v. ou yang lin q, FA1761403 (Forum Dec. 29, 2017) (finding bad faith where the respondent used the infringing domain name to disrupt the complainant's business by diverting Internet users from the complainant's website to the respondent's website where it offered competing printer products).  Accordingly, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and uses the Domain Name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii).

 

The Panel finds Complainant has satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).

 

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 <lookingforaplaceformom.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

Nicholas J.T. Smith, Panelist

Dated: March 13, 2025