DECISION

 

Weller Recreation, LLC v. Paul Weller

Claim Number: FA2607002236552

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Weller Recreation, LLC ("Complainant"), represented by Brett N. Anderson of Blackburn & Stoll, LC, Utah, USA. Respondent is Paul Weller ("Respondent"), Utah, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <wellerrecreation.com>, registered with Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu.

 

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 July 31, 2026; Forum received payment on July 31, 2026.

 

On August 4, 2026, Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <wellerrecreation.com> domain name is registered with Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu has verified that Respondent is bound by the Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu 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 August 10, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of August 31, 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@wellerrecreation.com.

 

Also on August 10, 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 September 1, 2026, 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.

 

On September 3, 2026, the Panel issued Procedural Order #1 pursuant to r.12 of the Rules requesting further statements on or before and permitting Respondent to make submissions not later than four (4) calendar days following receipt of said further statements. Timely further statements were received, and Respondent did not make any submissions.

 

On September 14, 2026, additional submissions were submitted to Forum. No application was made to the Panel to admit additional late submissions. In the interest of fair procedures and expedition, the Panel has not admitted or considered said additional submissions as they would cause further delay to the process.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the disputed domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PRELIMINARY ISSUE: EFFECT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS

        UDRP Rule 18 addresses the Effect of Court Proceedings and provides "(a) In the event of any legal proceedings initiated prior to or during an administrative proceeding in respect of a domain-name dispute that is the subject of the complaint, the Panel shall have the discretion to decide whether to suspend or terminate the administrative proceeding, or to proceed to a decision."

 

Complainant has provided details of court proceedings which it has commenced against a number of Parties in the United States District Court of the District of Utah. As there is no evidence that Complainant is progressing those proceedings, and Complainant has commenced this Complaint after commencing those proceedings, and there are no submissions from Respondent, the Panel exercises its discretion pursuant to Rule 18(a) to proceed to a decision.

 

PRELIMINARY ISSUE: AGREEMENT TO TRANSFER

Complainant has filed a document signed by Paul Weller, president of Complainant corporation, in which he purports to assign his interests in the disputed domain name to Complainant.

 

This is a surprising, and confusing, submission as it contradicts Complainant's core position that the disputed domain name was registered by a person availing of a proxy service. 

 

Complainant has provided convincing evidence that the disputed domain name was not registered by its president, and therefore he has no rights of assignment. Effectively Complainant has submitted a purported assignment by a third party.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

Complainant describes itself as Utah's most trusted powersports dealership and claims rights in the WELLER RECREATION trademark established through long use of the mark in its business providing powersports products, including on its website at <www.wellerrec.com> for approximately 25 years.

 

Complainant adds that it has operated a Utah powersports dealership since 1996, serving Northern Utah from Kamas and offering new and pre-owned snowmobiles, ATVs, UTVs, and personal watercraft as an authorized dealer for Ski-Doo, Polaris, Can-Am, and Yamaha.

 

Complainant submits that it has carried on business through its official website at <www.wellerrec.com> for approximately 25 years, with the website active continuously since about 2001, using the WELLER RECREATION name and mark.

 

Firstly, Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's mark, arguing that it reproduces the WELLER RECREATION mark in its entirety, differing from Complainant's own long-used <wellerrec.com> domain only by spelling out "recreation."

 

Complainant adds that the disputed site reinforces the alleged confusion by displaying "WELLER Recreation" and "WELLER RECREATION LLC," using Complainant's Kamas address, and presenting itself as a powersports dealership, while substituting an unaffiliated telephone number and email address and displaying allegedly fake product listings.

 

Secondly Complainant alleges that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name arguing that:

·       Respondent is an unknown entity that has masked or hidden its identity and created the disputed domain name only recently, whereas the Complainant has owned and managed <wellerrec.com> for more than 20 years;

·       as shown in the images presented by Complainant in the Complaint, the disputed domain name is used as the address of a fake website that purports to clone Complainant's legitimate website, rather than for any bona fide business of the Respondent;

·       also as shown in the exhibits in the Complaint, the website to which the disputed domain name resolves provides Internet visitors with Complainant's correct actual business address while providing a bogus telephone number and fake product listings;

·       furthermore, the email address and telephone number shown on the website to which the disputed domain name resolves are not associated with the Complainant and products listed there are not offered by the Complainant.

 

Complainant adds that because the website to which the disputed domain name resolves is a copy of Complainant's website and purports to offer similar products and offerings, it is therefore a scam site based on the Complainant's website.

 

Complainant submits that rather than putting the disputed domain name to any legitimate use it is being used by Respondent to perpetrate DNS abuse and fraud on customers.

 

Thirdly, Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith because it was created only on May 29, 2025, despite the Complainant's long-standing use of the WELLER RECREATION mark and ownership and operation of Complainant's website at <www.wellerrec.com>.

 

Complainant argues that the registrant's identity is concealed through privacy redactions, and Complainant's founder which it characterizes as evidence of fraudulent registration. Additionally, the Registrar has revealed that Respondent has registered the disputed domain name using the name Paul Weller, who is the President of the board of Complainant.

 

Complainant adds that the website to which the disputed domain name resolves is a clone of Complainant's legitimate website, at <www.wellerrec.com>, and is operated to scam customers.

 

The screen captures which are exhibited in the Complaint and its annexes, illustrate that the website to which the disputed domain name resolves adopts the name and mark WELLER RECREATION, presents itself as "WELLER RECREATION LLC," and falsely portrays itself as a powersports dealership in Kamas, Utah.

 

Complainant adds that the website to which the disputed domain name resolves displays Complainant's actual business address—936 W. 200 S., Kamas, Utah 84036—while, according to the Complainant, falsely representing that the site is related to or authorized by it.

 

However, the telephone contact number provided for Respondent on his website are false.

 

Complainant submits that Respondents website presents an inventory of powersports products and uses substantially similar business descriptions. However, it additionally offers products such as golf carts and forklifts which are not offered for sale by Complainant.

 

The disputed site advertises "free delivery," online ordering with in-store pickup, and payment options which in the circumstances is indicative of fraud on the part of Respondent.

 

In conclusion Complainant alleges that the website to which the disputed domain name resolves is used to confuse and divert its customers, to offer products that are not legitimately for sale, and to obtain fraudulent down payments and shipping charges; and argues that such use constitutes use in bad faith for the purposes of the Policy.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

C. Additional Submissions

In response to Procedural Order #1 issued pursuant to r.12 of the Rules Complainant provided further statements supporting its claim to trademark rights. No timely submissions were received from Respondent.

 

In the interest of fair procedures and expedition, the Panel has not admitted or considered any subsequent submissions filed.

 

FINDINGS

Complaints is a vendor of powersports products using WELLER RECREATION as an unregistered trademark.

 

Complainant has an established Internet presence and maintains its principal website at <www.wellerrec.com>

 

The disputed domain name was registered on May 29, 2025, and resolves to a website which is a clone of Complainant's website, purporting to advertise similar products and services.

 

There is no information available about Respondent except for that provided by Complainant in its Complaint and submissions, the Registrar's WhoIs and the information provided by the Registrar in response to the request by Forum for details of the registration of the disputed domain name for the purposes of this proceeding.

 

The Panel finds that the evidence shows that on the balance of probabilities Respondent has registered the disputed domain name using false identity.

 

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 as 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 3.1 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

Notwithstanding that Complainant has no trademark registrations, the Panel accepts that Complainant has provided convincing evidence that it has acquired common law trademark rights in the WELLER RECREATION mark through long use of the mark in its business selling powersports products, including on its website at <www.wellerrec.com>.

 

The disputed domain name <wellerrecreation.com> is identical to Complainant's mark.

 

It is well established that the generic Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") extension <.com> may be ignored for the purposes of comparison, as it would be perceived by Internet users as a necessary element of a domain name.

 

Applying these principles this Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to the WELLER RECREATION mark in which Complainant has rights at common law 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 Respondent has no rights legitimate interests in the disputed domain names as set out in Complainant's detailed submissions above.

 

In particular, the uncontested evidence is that Respondent does not have any bona fide business but is using the disputed domain name as the address of a website that purports to impersonate Complainant, on which Respondent purports to offer goods which are similar to those offered by Complainant, but also offers goods which are not part of Complainant's catalogue. Such use of Complainant's trademark in the disputed domain cannot establish rights or legitimate interests.

 

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 paragraph 4(a)(ii).

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

The disputed domain name, which is identical to Complainant's mark, was registered on May 29, 2025, at which time Complainant had established protectable rights in WELLER RECREATION at common law through long use of the mark in its business as a trademark.

 

WELLER RECREATION is a very distinctive mark, and it is most improbable that anyone would choose and register that mark as a domain name without actual knowledge of Complainant and its business.

 

The Panel finds therefore that the disputed domain name was chosen and registered in bad faith with Complainant and its mark in mind with the intention of taking predatory advantage of Complainant and its goodwill in the WELLER RECREATION mark.

 

The uncontested evidence is that Respondent is using the disputed domain name as the address of a website on which he purports to offer goods which are similar to Complainant's goods. The false impression created by the website is that it is owned by or associated with Complainant.

 

Such use of Complainant's trademark within the disputed domain name as the address of the resolving website is on the balance of probabilities intentionally intended to attract and confuse Internet users and cause them to divert their Internet traffic intended for the Complainant and misdirect it to Respondent's website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent's website, which constitutes use of the disputed domain name in bad faith for the purposes of the Policy.

 

Furthermore, the uncontested evidence indicates that Respondent has registered the disputed domain name using a false identity and has given false contact details to the public on his website, which also constitutes registration and use in bad faith for the purposes of the Policy.

 

As this Panel has found that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith, the Complainant has succeeded in the third element of the test in Policy paragraph 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 <wellerrecreation.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

__________________________________________

 

James Bridgeman SC, Panelist

Dated: September 14, 2026