URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community v. Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf
Claim Number: FA2512002194293


DOMAIN NAME

   <mystic-lake.website>

PARTIES

   Complainant: Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Prior Lake, MN, United States of America
  
Complainant Representative: Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP David Silverman of Washington, DC, United States of America

   Respondent: Kieran Holmes of Rotherham, South Yorkshire, Afghanistan
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

   Registries: Radix Technologies Inc SEZC
   Registrars: NAMECHEAP INC

EXAMINER

   The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Examiner in this proceeding.
   Petter Rindforth, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

   Complainant Submitted: December 12, 2025
   Commencement: December 16, 2025
   Default Date: December 31, 2025
   Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules").

RELIEF SOUGHT

   Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

   Clear and convincing evidence.

FINDINGS and DISCUSSION


   Findings of Fact: The Complainant is the owner of several U.S. trademark registrations with MYSTIC as a part, including but not limited to: No. 1,882,743 MYSTIC LAKE (word), registered on March 7, 1995, and renewed on February 19, 2025, for service in Intl. Classes 41 and 42. The Complainant has provided evidence of use of the trademark, by screenshots from the website www.mysticlake.com.

  

Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.


[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word mark:
  (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
  (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
  (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 

As noted, Complainant has valid trademark rights in MYSTIC LAKE. The disputed domain name <mystic-lake.website> is indeed confusingly similar to Complainants trademark/s.


[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 

Complainant has established that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.


[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
  a. Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
  b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
  c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
  d. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant's web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant's web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 

The disputed domain name is similar - close to identical . to Complainant's registered trademark and used for the same services.

FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD

  

The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods.

The Examiner finds as follows:

  1. The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods. 

DETERMINATION

  

After reviewing the parties' submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name(s) be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:

  1. mystic-lake.website


   Petter Rindforth
Examiner
Dated: January 4, 2026

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page