DECISION

 

Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain

Claim Number: FA2602002206791

PARTIES

Complainant is Walmart Apollo, LLC ("Complainant"), represented by Fatima Y. Kassem of Brooks Kushman P.C., Michigan, USA. Respondent is Zeeshan Arain ("Respondent"), Pakistan.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <penplusgears.com> (the "Disputed Domain Name"), registered with Spaceship, 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.

 

David L. Kreider, Chartered Arbitrator (UK), as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on February 23, 2026; Forum received payment on February 23, 2026.

 

On February 24, 2026, Spaceship, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <penplusgears.com> domain name is registered with Spaceship, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Spaceship, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Spaceship, 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 March 2, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 23, 2026 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@penplusgears.com. Also on March 2, 2026, 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 24, 2026, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed David L. Kreider 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

Complainant is a multinational retail corporation operating a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and grocery stores, founded in 1962 in Rogers, Arkansas. Complainant operates nearly 10,000 stores worldwide with over 4,000 stores in the United States, and had fiscal year 2025 revenue of $674.5 billion. Complainant owns the domain name walmart.com and maintains a website thereon. Complainant has used its PEN+GEAR brand since at least 2017 to identify its office supplies, school supplies, and general stationery products sold at Walmart stores and online. Complainant owns numerous United States trademark registrations for the PEN+GEAR mark, the earliest being Registration Nos. 5,351,828, 5,352,234, 5,352,231, and 5,352,232, all registered in 2017.

 

Complainant alleges that the Disputed Domain Name <penplusgears.com> is confusingly similar to its PEN+GEAR trademarks because it fully incorporates the mark, with the addition of an "s" to "GEAR" and the substitution of the word "plus" for the symbol "+," which do not distinguish the Disputed Domain Name from Complainant's mark in any meaningful way. The addition of the gTLD ".com" likewise does not remove any likelihood of confusion.

 

Complainant alleges that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name. Respondent is not affiliated with Complainant, is not authorized to use the PEN+GEAR trademarks, and is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name. Complainant alleges that Respondent used the Disputed Domain Name to operate a website (the "Respondent's Website") that falsely presents itself as the official website for Walmart's PEN+GEAR brand, prominently displays Complainant's PEN+GEAR trademarks and copyrighted product images, and includes "Shop Now," "Buy Now," and "View on Amazon" links that redirect consumers to Amazon product pages featuring competing products. Respondent's Website also lists Complainant's address—406 S. Walton Blvd, Bentonville, Arkansas 72712—and Complainant's customer service phone number, 1-800-925-6278, on its "About Us" page, without any affiliation with Complainant.

 

Complainant alleges that Respondent registered and is using the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith. Respondent registered the domain on October 19, 2025, long after Complainant established its rights in the PEN+GEAR trademarks. Complainant contends that Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's rights, as evidenced by the use of Complainant's trademarks, copyrighted images, address, and phone number on Respondent's Website. Complainant further contends that Respondent is a repeat offender, having previously suffered adverse UDRP decisions involving Complainant in substantially similar cases. Complainant cites bad faith under Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(ii), 4(b)(iii), and 4(b)(iv).

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

The Panel finds the following:

 

Complainant owns registered trademarks for the PEN+GEAR mark used in connection with office supplies, school supplies, and general stationery products. Complainant's earliest United States trademark registrations for PEN+GEAR include Registration Nos. 5,351,828, 5,352,234, 5,352,231, and 5,352,232, all registered in 2017.

 

Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name <penplusgears.com> on October 19, 2025.

 

The Registrar-supplied WHOIS information identifies Respondent as "Zeeshan Arain." There is no evidence that Respondent is commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name or by PEN+GEAR or any similar name under Policy Paragraph 4(c)(ii).

 

The Disputed Domain Name resolves to Respondent's Website, which falsely presents itself as the official website for Complainant's PEN+GEAR brand. The website prominently displays Complainant's PEN+GEAR trademarks and copyrighted product images, and includes links labeled "Shop Now," "Buy Now," and "View on Amazon" that redirect consumers to Amazon product pages featuring competing products. The website's "About Us" page lists Complainant's address—406 S. Walton Blvd, Bentonville, Arkansas 72712—and Complainant's customer service phone number, 1-800-925-6278. The Panel considers that the website is designed to mislead consumers into believing it is affiliated with or operated by Complainant.

 

Respondent is a repeat offender of the Policy, having previously suffered adverse UDRP decisions in proceedings brought by Complainant: Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain / Personal, FA 2181856; Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain, FA 2181593; and Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain, FA 2124304.

 

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 Overview 3.1 at ¶ 4.3.

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

Complainant has established rights in the PEN+GEAR mark through its United States trademark registrations and use in commerce since at least 2017. The Disputed Domain Name <penplusgears.com> incorporates Complainant's PEN+GEAR mark in its entirety, substituting the word "plus" for the symbol "+" and adding the letter "s" to "GEAR," along with the gTLD ".com." These minor modifications do not sufficiently distinguish the Disputed Domain Name from Complainant's mark. Where a relevant trademark is recognizable within a disputed domain name, the addition of other terms does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity under the first element. See Bloomberg Finance L.P. v. Nexperian Holding Limited, FA 1782013 (Forum June 4, 2018) ("Where a relevant trademark is recognisable within a disputed domain name, the addition of other terms (whether descriptive, geographical, pejorative, meaningless, or otherwise) does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity under the first element."); see also Rockwell Automation v. Zhao Ke, FA 1760051 (Forum Jan. 2, 2018) (finding confusing similarity where the disputed domain name corresponded to complainant's mark with the space omitted and a TLD appended). The inclusion of the gTLD ".com" is irrelevant to the confusing similarity analysis. See WIPO Overview 3.1, ¶ 1.11.1.

 

The Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant's PEN+GEAR trademark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Complainant must first make a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name, at which point the burden shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests. See WIPO Overview 3.1, ¶ 2.1.

 

The WHOIS information identifies Respondent as "Zeeshan Arain," and there is no evidence that Respondent has been commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). Respondent is not affiliated with Complainant and is not licensed or authorized to use the PEN+GEAR trademarks.

 

Respondent used the Disputed Domain Name to operate Respondent's Website, which falsely presents itself as the official website for Complainant's PEN+GEAR brand, prominently displays Complainant's trademarks and copyrighted product images, and redirects consumers to Amazon to purchase competing products. This constitutes passing off and is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). See eBay Inc. v. Mohd. mohd.Danish / westernenterprises, FA 1756923 (Forum Dec. 1, 2017) (finding lack of rights or legitimate interests where the disputed domain was used for an online retail website displaying complainant's mark in a similar font and color scheme, with a site design similar to that of complainant's site). Use of a domain name for illegal activity such as impersonation or the sale of counterfeit goods can never confer rights or legitimate interests. See WIPO Overview 3.1, ¶ 2.13.1.

 

Respondent has not submitted a Response or provided any evidence of rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name. The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name on October 19, 2025, more than eight years after Complainant established rights in the PEN+GEAR mark through use in commerce and federal trademark registration. The Disputed Domain Name incorporates the PEN+GEAR mark in its entirety, and Respondent's Website prominently displays Complainant's trademarks, copyrighted product images, address, and customer service phone number. The Panel has no difficulty finding that Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name with actual knowledge of Complainant's rights. See WIPO Overview 3.1, ¶ 3.1.4; see also AutoZone Parts, Inc. v. Ken Belden, FA 1815011 (Forum Dec. 24, 2018) (finding actual knowledge where respondent used complainant's mark to pass itself off as complainant and offer merchandise for sale identical to complainant's offering).

 

Respondent used the Disputed Domain Name to operate Respondent's Website, which impersonates Complainant's PEN+GEAR brand, displays Complainant's trademarks and copyrighted product images, and redirects consumers to Amazon to purchase competing products for Respondent's commercial gain. This conduct is calculated to attract internet users to Respondent's Website by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to source, sponsorship, or affiliation, and constitutes bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See ZIH Corp. v. ou yang lin q, FA 1761403 (Forum Dec. 29, 2017) (finding bad faith where respondent used the infringing domain name to disrupt complainant's business by diverting internet users from complainant's website to respondent's website where it offered competing products).

 

The Panel also notes that Respondent's Website discloses its participation in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to earn advertising fees by linking to Amazon. Respondent's use of Complainant's PEN+GEAR trademarks and copyrighted product images to drive consumer traffic to Amazon through affiliate links, while posing as Complainant's official website, constitutes a scheme to generate affiliate commissions by trading on Complainant's goodwill. This further evidences Respondent's commercial motivation and bad faith.

 

Furthermore, Respondent is a repeat offender of the Policy, having previously suffered adverse UDRP decisions in proceedings brought by Complainant involving substantially similar conduct. See Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain / Personal, FA 2181856; Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain, FA 2181593; Walmart Apollo, LLC v. Zeeshan Arain, FA 2124304. Respondent's history reveals a pattern of domain name abuse and suggests bad faith in the instant case under Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii). See Tommy John, Inc. v. Carolina Rodrigues / Fundacion Comercio Electronico, FA 1878688 (Forum Feb. 6, 2020) (finding bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii) where the respondent had been subject to numerous UDRP proceedings where panels ordered the transfer of disputed domain names containing the trademarks of the complainants).

 

The Panel finds that Respondent registered and is using the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith under 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 <penplusgears.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

David L. Kreider, Panelist

Dated: March 25, 2026