DECISION
BELK STORES SERVICE, LLC and THE LIMITED LLC v. yanran du
Claim Number: FA2608002240677
PARTIES
Complainant is BELK STORES SERVICE, LLC and THE LIMITED LLC ("Complainants"), represented by Jacob S. Wharton of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, North Carolina, USA. Respondent is yanran du ("Respondent"), China.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com>, registered with Dynadot Inc.
PANEL
Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on August 19, 2026. Forum received payment on August 19, 2026.
On August 20, 2026, Dynadot Inc confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names are registered with Dynadot Inc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. Dynadot Inc has verified that Respondent is bound by the Dynadot 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 August 21, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of September 10, 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@crown-ivy.com, postmaster@thelimitedcloth.com. Also on August 21, 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 11, 2026, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury 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
Complainants request that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainants.
PRELIMINARY ISSUE: MULTIPLE COMPLAINANTS
In the instant proceedings, there are two Complainants. Paragraph 3(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") provides that "[a]ny person or entity may initiate an administrative proceeding by submitting a complaint." Forum's Supplemental Rule 1(e) defines "The Party Initiating a Complaint Concerning a domain name Registration" as a "single person or entity claiming to have rights in the domain name, or multiple persons or entities who have a sufficient nexus who can each claim to have rights to all domain names listed in the Complaint."
Complainants submit that:
"Complainants' Marks are each Belk-exclusive brand names that are sold exclusively in Belk's retail and online stores in the United States. Further, The Limited's intellectual property was acquired by Sycamore Partners, which also owns Belk, and Belk was made the exclusive distributor of LIMITED-branded goods. Belk manages and sells The Limited as one of its private-label brands. The Limited went bankrupt and closed all stores in early 2017. Sycamore Partners acquired The Limited intellectual property. Belk, also owned by Sycamore Partners, then became the exclusive distributor of The Limited Brand. Belk sells the brand in stores and online."
The Panel notes that Belk Stores Service, LLC is the registrant of the CROWN & IVY trademark and that it sells both CROWN & IVY and THE LIMITED branded products. The Limited LLC is the registrant of the trademark THE LIMITED but there is no evidence that it sells CROWN & IVY branded products or has any interest in the CROWN & IVY mark.
Under these circumstances and in the absence of Sycamore Partners as a complainant, the Panel is not persuaded that there is a sufficient nexus between Complainants such that each can claim to have rights to both domain names listed in the Complaint. Accordingly, this decision will henceforth refer to Belk Stores Service, LLC as "Complainant", while referring to both Complainants as "Complainants".
PARTIES' CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
Complainant Belk Stores Service, LLC is an American department store chain based in North Carolina, with stores across the southeastern United States. In addition to carrying numerous well-known third-party brands, Complainant produces and/or sells several private brands that are only available in Complainant's stores and on Complainant's website at <belk.com>. These Belk-exclusive brands include CROWN & IVY and THE LIMITED.
Complainant has registered trademark rights in CROWN & IVY and is licensed exclusively by its parent Sycamore Partners to use the mark THE LIMITED, registered by The Limited LLC.
The <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names are confusingly similar to Complainants' marks.
Respondent has no legitimate rights or interests in the <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names. Respondent is not licensed to use the marks; is not a subsidiary, affiliate, or licensee of Complainants, nor controlled by Complainants, nor an agent of Complainants, nor otherwise affiliated with Complainants. Moreover, Respondent yanran du is not known by either of the domain names. Respondent uses Complainants' marks and copyrighted content in the domain names and on the sites hosted at the domain names in an obvious attempt to create the impression that the domain names are affiliated with, authorized or endorsed by, or otherwise associated with Complainants, when no such connection exists. The use of a domain name by a registrant to pass itself off as, or suggest endorsement by, a complainant is not a bona fide offering of goods or services.
The <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith. Complainants' marks are well-known in connection with the goods and services with which they are registered, and there is no good faith basis under which Respondent could reasonably adopt Complainants' marks in their entirety in the domain names, to promote goods that are identical to those sold by Complainant. Respondent plainly had actual notice of Complainants' rights in and to Complainants' marks, including upon registration and first use of the domain names. It is simply implausible that Respondent could have unknowingly adopted domain names that are essentially identical to Complainants' marks and misappropriated Complainants' marks (frequently indicated by the ® registered trademark symbol) and copyrighted images of Complainants' products and product descriptions from Complainant's own website, to promote Complainants' goods on the fraudulent websites hosted on the domain names, without actual notice of Complainants' rights.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
FINDINGS
Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.
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 3.1 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
Complainant has shown that it has rights in the mark CROWN & IVY, including USPTO Registration No. 5,050,072, registered on September 27, 2026, for inter alia clothing, namely, tops, bottoms, jackets, vests, dresses, skirts, pants, scarves, socks; footwear and headwear, in International Class 25. Further, as exclusive licensee, Complainant has rights in the mark THE LIMITED, registered by The Limited LLC, including USPTO Registration No. 5,091,388, registered on November 29, 2026, for active wear, namely, leggings and yoga pants, in International Class 25.
The Panel finds Respondent's <crown-ivy.com> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant's registered CROWN & IVY mark, only differing by the omission of the spaces between the words and the substitution of a dash for the ampersand; and finds Respondent's <thelimitedcloth.com> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant's licensed THE LIMITED mark, only differing by the omission of the spaces between the words and the addition of the descriptive word "cloth". These differences are insufficient to distinguish the domain names from Complainants' marks. The inconsequential ".com" generic top-level domain ("gTLD") may be ignored under this element. See Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, D2000-0429 (WIPO June 25, 2000).
Complainant has established this element.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides that any of the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be proved based on its evaluation of all evidence presented, shall demonstrate Respondent's rights or legitimate interests to a domain name for purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(ii):
(i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
The <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names were both registered on October 9, 2025, several years after the registrations of Complainant's CROWN & IVY mark and its licensed THE LIMITED mark. The <crown-ivy.com> domain name resolves to a website prominently displaying Complainant's CROWN & IVY mark, frequently with the added symbol ™ and offering "CROWN AND IVY" clothing for sale, with text and images copied from Complainant's website.
The <thelimitedcloth.com> domain name resolves to a website entitled "The Limited® Clothing Official Website", prominently displaying Complainant's licensed THE LIMITED mark, frequently with the added symbol ® and offering "THE LIMITED" clothing for sale, with text and images copied from Complainant's website.
These circumstances, together with Complainant's assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names. See JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Dryx Emerson / KMF Events LTD, FA 1849706 (Forum July 17, 2019). Respondent has made no attempt to do so.
The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names.
Complainant has established this element.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy is expressed in the conjunctive: "the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith" and Paragraph 4(b) sets out four illustrative circumstances, which, though not exclusive, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii), including:
(iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your 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 your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.
The circumstances set out above in relation to the second element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant, its CROWN & IVY mark and its licensed THE LIMITED mark when Respondent registered the <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names and that Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent's websites, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainants' marks as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's websites and of the products promoted on those websites. This demonstrates registration and use in bad faith to attract users for commercial gain under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).
Complainant has established this element.
DECISION
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <crown-ivy.com> and <thelimitedcloth.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant Belk Stores Service, LLC.
Alan L. Limbury, Panelist
Dated: September 12, 2026
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page