Twitter, Inc. v. Chen Wei Peng
Claim Number: FA1510001644060




   Complainant: Twitter, Inc. of San Francisco, CA, United States of America
Complainant Representative: The GigaLaw Firm, Douglas M Isenberg, Attorney at Law, LLC Douglas M Isenberg of Atlanta, GA, United States of America

   Respondent: Chen Wei Peng Chen Wei Peng of Song Jiang Qu, SH, II, China


   Registries: Blue Sky Registry Limited
   Registrars: Chengdu West Dimension Digital Technology Co., Ltd.


   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.
   Ms. Marie Emmanuelle Haas, as Examiner


   Complainant Submitted: October 26, 2015
   Commencement: October 27, 2015
   Default Date: November 13, 2015
   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").


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


   Clear and convincing evidence.


   Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment]


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] 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 

URS paragraph The domain name at issue is composed with the Complainant’s TWITTER trademark, together with the extension “.party”. The domain name is identical to the Complainant’s trademark.

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

Determined: Finding for Complainant 

URS paragraph Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name, which is composed with the famous TWITTER trademark. He has not been authorized to use the domain name and he has no identical trademark nor offers related services. Respondent has not made any demonstrable preparations to use the domain name in relation with a bona fide offering of goods or services. He is not commonly known under the domain name at issue and does not make any fair and noncommercial use of that domain name.

[URS] 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 

URS paragraph Given the strength and worldwide fame of the TWITTER Trademark, Respondent cannot have ignored the Complainant’s rights when registering the domain name at issue. Registrant is not using the domain name in connection with an active website, which results in pay-per-click links related to Complainant being displayed for visitors who attempt to visit a website using the domain name. It is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law. For these reasons, the Examiner finds that, Complainant made a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that the disputed domain name should be suspended.


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. 


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. twitter.party


Ms. Marie Emmanuelle Haas
Dated: November 19, 2015



Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page