Business Magazine Lost In UDRP To Trademark Filed Two Years After Domain

Posted on the 30 January 2014 by Worldwide @thedomains

Lil’ Drug Store Products, Inc. just won control of the domain name in a one member panel UDRP.

The domain holder did not respond.

The factual findings pertinent to the decision in this case are that:

1.   Complainant has since 2003 sold fertility enhancement preparations including non-spermicidal personal lubricants and moisturizers by reference to the trademark PRE-SEED;

2.   Complainant owns United States Trademark Reg. No. 2,972,756 registered July 19, 2005 for the word mark PRE-SEED;

3.   The disputed domain name was registered on January 9, 2003;

4.   The domain name resolves to a website that features products similar to those offered by Complainant, as well as unrelated goods and services.

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

There is no evidence that the disputed domain name has been used in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services prior to notice of the dispute. 

Complainant provides evidence that the disputed domain name resolved to a website located at <> which featured “Early Detection Pregnancy Tests,” “Ovulation Tests,” “Pre-Seed,” “Digital Basal,” “FertilAid for Women,” “FertilTea,” and “Pregnancy Plus Prenatal.” 

This is not bona fide

Panel finds that Complainant has established a prima facie case and so the onus shifts to Respondent to establish a legitimate interest in the domain name.  In the absence of a Response, that case is not rebutted and so Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or interests and so finds that Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy.

Panel accepts Complainant’s submissions with respect to paragraph 4(b)(iii) of the Policy since it is not implausible to infer that Respondent is a competitor to Complainant. 

Prior panels have found bad faith under paragraph 4(b)(iii) when a respondent uses a disputed domain name to resolve to a website offering products and services that compete with complainant and as a result disrupts complainant’s legitimate business.

Panel finds registration and use in bad faith and so the third element of the Policy is established.

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog