ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS DISPUTE RESOLUTION POLICY

 

DECISION

 

C.R. Bard, Inc. v. John Campbell d/b/a Bard's Products, Inc.

Claim Number: FA0412000386031

 

PARTIES

Complainant is C.R. Bard, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Roberta S.Bren, 730 Central Ave., Murray Hill, NJ 07974.  Respondent is John Campbell d/b/a Bard’s Products, Inc. (“Respondent”), 1427 Armour Blvd, Mundelein, IL 60060.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED REGISTERED NAME

The Registered Name at issue is <bards.name>, registered with Go Daddy Software, Inc.

 

PANEL

The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially that and to the best of her knowledge, she has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (“the Forum”) electronically December 21, 2004; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint December 21, 2004.

 

On December 21, 2004, Go Daddy Software, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the Registered Name <bards.name> is registered with Go Daddy Software, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the Registered Name.  Go Daddy Software, Inc. verified that Respondent is bound by the Go Daddy Software, Inc. registration agreement and thereby has agreed to resolve registered name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with the Eligibility Requirements Dispute Resolution Policy (“ERDRP”).

 

On December 29, 2004 a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of January 18, 2005, by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent in compliance with 2(a) of the Rules of Procedure for the Eligibility Requirements Dispute Resolution Policy (the “ERDRP Rules”)

 

Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

Having reviewed the communications, the Administrative Panel (“the Panel”) finds that the Forum discharged its responsibilities under Paragraph 2(a) of the ERDRP Rules.  Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ERDRP, ERDRP Rules, the Forum’s ERDRP Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any Response from Respondent. 

 

On January 24, 2005, pursuant to ERDRP Rule 6(b), the Forum appointed Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson as the single Panelist.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the Registered Name be cancelled pursuant to Policy ¶ 5(f)(i)(A).

 

PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS

A.     Complainant

 

Complainant asserts that its legal name is C.R. Bard Inc. 

 

Complainant contends that Respondent registered <bards.name> in violation of the Eligibility Requirements for the following reasons:

 

1.                  Respondent’s legal name is John Campbell and does not include the word “bards.”

 

2.                  Respondent does not own trademark or service mark rights to the name of a fictional character, as provided for by Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii) of the Policy.  Respondent owns trademark registration rights for the BARD’S mark for goods including padlocks, bells and electric light bases.  However, none of the products are related to a fictional character. 

 

3.                  Respondent, as an individual, is not commonly known as “Bards.”

 

B.     Respondent

 

No Response was received.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant instituted this action as C.R. Bard, Inc. pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b) of the ERDRP.

 

Respondent registered the disputed Registered name <bards.name> on November 25, 2004.  Respondent has not presented any evidence to show that its legal name includes Bards. 

 

Complainant has provided print outs of Respondent’s website and copies of Respondent’s registered BARDS mark with the United States Patent and Trademarks Office.  The mark was registered by Respondent in 1982, and expired in 2002.  However, the registration also reflects that the current status of the mark as “renewed.”

 

DISCUSSION

Paragraph 15(a) of the ERDRP Rules instructs this Panel to “decide a Complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable.”

 

In view of Respondent’s failure to submit a Response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of the Complainant’s undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a), and 15(a) of the ERDRP Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the ERDRP Rules.

 

Paragraph 4(b) of the ERDRP requires Complainant to prove each of the following elements in order to establish that the Registered Name was registered in violation of the Eligibility Requirements and obtain an order that a Registered Name should be cancelled:

 

(1)    the name corresponding to the Registered Name is not the legal name of Respondent; and

(2)    the name corresponding to the Registered Name is not the name of a fictional character in which the Respondent has trademark or service mark rights; and

(3)    the Respondent has not been commonly known by the name corresponding with the Registered Name.

 

If the above elements are shown, and the Complainant requests that the Registered Name be cancelled, paragraph 5(f)(i)(B) of the ERDRP requires the Complainant to establish that it meets the Eligibility Requirements correspondent to the Registered Name.  In order to meet the Eligibility Requirements Complainant must provide evidence of one or more of the following:

 

(1)    the name corresponding to the Registered Name is the legal name of Complainant; or

(2)    the name corresponding to the Registered Name is the name of a fictional character in which the Complainant has trademark or service mark rights; or

(3)    the Complainant has been commonly known by the name corresponding to the Registered Name.

 

Respondent’s Eligibility

 

Legal Name

It is assumed that Respondent’s legal name is John Campbell.  No evidence indicates otherwise.  Therefore, Respondent’s registration of <bards.name> does not meet this Eligibiilty Requirement, and ERDRP Policy ¶ 4(b)(i) has been satisfied.

 

            Name of Fictional Character

There is evidence indicating that Respondent owns trademark and service mark rights for the BARDS mark.  However, Respondent’s rights in the BARDS mark does not represent or correspond to a name of a fictitious character.  Therefore, Respondent does not meet this Eligibility Requirement, and ERDRP Policy ¶ 4(b)(i) has been satisfied.

 

            Commonly Known As

Respondent is known to this Panel only as “John Campbell” doing business under the name “Bard’s Products, Inc.” There is no evidence in the record, nor has Respondent come forward to establish that as an “individual” he is commonly known as “Bards.”  Therefore, Respondent does not meet this Eligibility Requirement in relation to the <bards.name> domain name and ERDRP Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii) has been satisfied.

 

Complainant’s Eligibility

 

The Panel finds that Respondent has not met any of the above Eligibility Requirements, and because Complainant asks only that the Registered Name be cancelled pursuant to Policy ¶ 5(f)(i)(A), a determination of Complainant’s eligibility is not required and the Registered Name may be cancelled. 

 

DECISION

In accordance with the ERDRP Rules, the relief sought by the Complaint is hereby GRANTED.

 

The Panel now orders that the registration for the Registered Name, <bards.name>, be CANCELLED.

 

 

                                          Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson, Panelist

Dated: February 7, 2005

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

 

Click Here to return to our Home Page.