NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM

DECISION

POLLO OPERATIONS, INC. v. Abdullah Ansari

Claim Number: FA2509002178578

PARTIES

Complainant is POLLO OPERATIONS, INC. ("Complainant"), represented by Janet C. Moreira of Caldera Law, Florida, USA. Respondent is Abdullah Ansari ("Respondent"), India.

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <pollolistens.cfd>, registered with NameCheap, Inc.

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 September 23, 2025; Forum received payment on September 23, 2025.

On September 24, 2025, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <pollolistens.cfd> Domain Name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. 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 September 25, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of October 15, 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@pollolistens.cfd. Also on September 25, 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 October 16, 2025 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 summarized as follows:

The Complainant is the owner of the mark POLLO TROPICAL registered, inter alia, in the USA for restaurant services since 1993. (Note from Panel: the element POLLO, meaning chicken in Spanish, is disclaimed from the Complainant's trade mark registrations.)

The Domain Name registered in 2025 is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trade mark including its POLLO element and adding the word 'listens' and the gTLD .cfd neither of which prevents this confusing similarity.

The Complainant is the exclusive licensee of the domain name <pollolistens.com> (owned by its parent company). The <pollolistens.com> domain name has been used by the Complainant in relation to customer surveys since 2014.

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

The Domain Name has been used for a site making prominent use of the Complainant's mark in its logo form, and also uses the <pollolistens.com> domain name, owned by the Complainant's parent company and used by the Complainant in relation to customer services since 2014, so that the Respondent's site appears to be a site associated with the Complainant. This is not a bona fide offering of goods and services or a legitimate non commercial use. It is registration and use in bad faith diverting and confusing Internet users in full knowledge of the Complainant and its rights.

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

FINDINGS

The Complainant is the owner of the mark POLLO TROPICAL registered, inter alia, in the USA for restaurant services since 1993. The element POLLO meaning chicken in Spanish is disclaimed from the Complainant's trade mark registrations.

The Domain Name registered in 2025 has been used for a site making prominent use of the Complainant's mark in its logo form. The site also mentions the <pollolistens.com> domain name owned by the Complainant's parent company and used by the Complainant in relation to customer services since 2014, so that the site appears to be a site associated with the Complainant.

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 takes only the disclaimed part of the Complainant's registered mark 'POLLO' meaning chicken over which the Complainant does not have exclusive rights.

The Complainant says it is the exclusive licensee of the <pollolistens.com> domain name (owned by its parent company) and the Complainant has used that domain name since 2014 in relation to customer surveys. It appears that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to 'pollolistens.com', but the Complainant has not claimed it has common law rights in 'pollolistens.com' or indeed that it is a mark distinctive of the Complainant. Additionally, even if the Complainant were able to prove it has used 'pollolistens.com' since 2014, a usage period sufficient to give rise to common law rights, whether the Complainant owns such common law rights will depend on the terms of the exclusive licence it has with its parent company concerning pollylistens.com which has not been exhibited to this Complaint.

Accordingly this Complaint is dismissed without prejudice to the Complainant or its parent company; re-filing should include evidence that either Complainant or its parent company has ownership of common law rights in 'pollolistens.com'.

Accordingly it is not necessary for the Panel to proceed to determinations in this case on rights or legitimate interests or registration and use in bad faith as the Complainant has not been able to satisfy the first element re: confusing similarity to a mark in which it has rights.

As a footnote, the Panel observes that there appears to be content that infringes marks of the Complainant on the site attached to the Domain Name, and should common law rights in pollolistens.com not be provable, this may be a case more appropriate for a Court of competent jurisdiction.

DECISION

Having not established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that this Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice.

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <pollolistens.cfd> domain name REMAIN WITH Respondent.

Dawn Osborne, Panelist

Dated: October 16, 2025