WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Great American Insurance Company v. C.M.E., Inc.
Case No D2001- 0086
1. The Parties
Great American Insurance Company ("Great American") commenced this administrative proceeding pursuant to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy") and the associated Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution (the "Rules") adopted by the Internet corporation for assigned names and numbers ("ICANN"). The Respondent is identified as C.M.E., Inc. whose contact address is 8635 West Sahara Avenue, #516, Las Vegas, Nevada 89117, USA.
2. The Domain Name(s) and Registrar
Respondent has entered into an Internet domain services agreement dated December 24, 1999, with Network Commerce, Inc. d/b/a Registrars.Com, a registrar located at 475 Sansome Street, #570, San Francisco, California 94111(the "Registrar"). The Respondent�s contract with the Registrar provides, among other things, that Internet message traffic addressed to the domain name "" be routed to computers specified by Respondent. The disputed domain name in this case is "" maintained by R.
3. Procedural History
Great American filed its Complaint with the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the World Intellectual Property Organization (the "Center") on or about January 17, 2001. By letter dated January 24, 2001, the Center notified the Respondent of the commencement of this proceeding and advised that Respondent had until February 12, 2001, in which to respond to the Complaint. The Respondent served no answer or other communication in response to the Complaint. By letter dated February 14, 2001, the Center notified Respondent that it was in default, but that Respondent could still submit an answer or other response which the Panel would be free, in its sole discretion, to consider or not. The undersigned was then appointed a single-member Panel for purposes of deciding the dispute. By March 27, 2001, the Respondent had served no answer or other response to the Complaint and had requested no extension of time in which to do so.
4. Factual Background
In view of the default of the Respondent, the Panel accepts as true, and uncontroverted, the well-pleaded allegations of the Complaint. The Complainant is the owner of U.S. Reg. No. 643,400 issued March 26, 1957, for the service mark GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY (stylized). The Complainant alleges that it has used GREAT AMERICAN as a trade name and service mark in connection with insurance underwriting services since November 24, 1917. The �400 registration is valid, subsisting and incontestable.
5. Parties� Contentions
A. Complainant
Great American contends that the accused domain name is confusingly similar to its trade name and registered service mark, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY. Great American further contends the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the accused domain name. Finally, Great American contends the Respondent obtained and has used the disputed domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent has not denied, and has thereby effectively admitted, the contentions of the Complainant.
6. Discussion and Findings
Section 4(a) of the Policy entitles a complainant, such as Great American, to seek an administrative transfer of a second level Internet domain name in the event that it "proves," to the satisfaction of the Panel, three predicates:
(1) an accused domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
(2) a registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the accused domain name; and
(3) a registrant�s domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
A fact is "proved," for purposes of the Policy, when it is "more likely than not to be true based on the evidence." Ciccone v. Parisi, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847.
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant�s registered service mark, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY. Further, in view of the Respondent�s failure to deny or controvert in any way the allegations made in the Complaint, the Panel infers that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name and registered and has used that domain name in bad faith.
7. Decision
For the reasons set forth above, I find in favor of the Complainant.The Registrar is hereby directed to transfer the accused domain name, "", to the Complainant.
James W. Dabney
Sole Panelist
Dated: March 27, 2001
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy