WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Ltd Commodities, Inc. v. Nadia Slepko
Case No. D2002-0554
1. The Parties
Complainant is Ltd Commodities, Inc., 2800 Lakeside Drive, Bannockburn, Illinois, 60015, United States of America.
Respondent is Nadia Slepko, Nezaleznosti Pr. 32, Kiev, 311014, Ukraine.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The domain name at issue (hereinafter the Domain Name) is .
The registrar of the Domain Name is BulkR, 10 East Baltimore Street, Suite 1500, Baltimore, Maryland, 312002, United States of America.
3. Procedural History
On June 16, 2002, the Complainant filed a complaint (hereinafter the "Complaint") sent by e-mail and in hardcopy on June 19, 2002, with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (hereinafter the "Center"), receipt of said Complaint being acknowledged by the Center in e-mail to the Complainant dated June 19, 2002.
On June 21, 2002, the Center proceeded to verify that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (hereinafter the "Policy"), adopted by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (hereinafter "ICANN") on August 26, 1999, the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (hereinafter the "Rules"), approved by ICANN, on October 24, 1999, and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (hereinafter the "Supplemental Rules").
In a letter and an e-mail dated June 24, 2002, the Center informed the Respondent of the commencement of the proceedings as of June 24, 2002, and a subsection 5 of the Rules which grants the Respondent 20 days to respond to the Complaint. Evidence provided by the Center supports the finding that the Center acted diligently in its attempts to inform the Respondent of the proceedings.
On July 18, 2002, the Center issued a Notification of Respondent Default. The Center then informed the Parties on July 25, 2002, that an administrative panel had been appointed. The Panel believes it was constituted in compliance with the Policy, Rules and Supplemental Rules and has also issued a Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence.
The Panel has received no further submissions from either of the Parties since its formation.
The Panel is obliged to issue a decision on or prior to August 8, 2002, in the English language, and is unaware of any proceedings which may have been undertaken by the parties or others in the present matter.
4. Factual Background
The Complainant is a corporation in business since 1963, incorporated under the rules of the state of Illinois. The Complainant�s activities are related to the field of catalogue mail order distributorships for general merchandise, including toys, house wares, and gifts. It is the owner of the trademark "Ltd Commodities, Inc." that is a protected service mark registered in the United Sates Trademark and Patent Office, Registration No. 2315412.
According to BulkR�s Whois database, The Respondent is a person domiciled in Kiev, Ukraine.
The Domain Name that is the subject of this Complaint was registered on or approximately February 8, 2000.
5. Parties� Contentions
A. Complainant
Complainant�s right in the mark
The Complainant contends that in accordance with Rules, para. 3(b)(viii), specification of the Complainant�s service mark on which this Complaint is based is as follows:
"The Complainant, LTD COMMODITIES, INC. has been in business since 1963 in the field of catalog mail order distributorships for general merchandise including toys, housewares, and gifts. The Complainant also conducts business from its commercial web site at . "Ltd Commodities, Inc. is a protected service mark registered in the United States Trademark and Patent Office, Registration No. 2315412. A copy of the registration certificates for this mark is provided as Annex 3 to this complaint."
Similarity of the marks
The Complainant contends that under the Rules, para. 3(b)(ix), the additional factual and legal grounds on which the Complaint is made are as follows:
"The Respondent's domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant�s mark "Ltd Commodities, Inc.", and the Complainant�s domain name , because the Respondent�s mark is simply a common misspelling of the Complainant�s mark."
Respondent�s rights or legitimate interests in the mark
The Complainant contends that:
"the Respondent should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name that is the subject of the Complaint for the following reasons. The Respondent has no registration for the mark "Ltd Commodites" either in whole or in part, and does not use this name on any of the commercial advertising web pages that result when the Respondent�s domain is entered. Furthermore, the Complainant finds no records indicating that the Respondent is involved with any legitimate enterprise under a name identical or confusingly similar to the mark in which the Complainant has rights."
Registration and use in bad faith
The Complainant contends that:
"the Respondent�s domain name should be considered as having been registered and used in bad faith under para 4(b) of the ICAAN policy because by registering and using the domain name, Respondent intentionally and for financial gain has attracted Internet users to online advertising and gambling web sites by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant�s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the registrant�s web site or location or of a product or service on the registrant�s web site or location."
B. Respondent
The Respondent has failed to submit a Response to the Complainant�s Complaint.
6. Discussion and Findings
Similarity of the marks
The Panel finds the Complainant has shown evidence that the Respondent�s domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant�s mark "Ltd Commodities, Inc." and the Complainant�s domain name . The Respondent�s domain name is simply a common misspelling of the Complainant�s domain name.
Complainant�s right in the mark
The Panel finds that the Complainant has shown sufficient evidence pointing towards the rights it holds in the mark "Ltd Commodities, Inc.". As appears from the registration certificate for this mark, provided in Annex 3 of the Complaint, the Complainant has proceeded with the registration of this mark. The Panel, proprio motu, has taken upon itself to visit the Complainant�s web site located at "" and has noted the use of the said trademark by the Complainant. The Complainant has also alleged that it uses the mark. The Complainant�s rights have been clearly established especially since the Respondent did not contest these rights.
Respondent�s rights or legitimate interests in the mark
The Panel finds that the Respondent should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name . The Complainant found that the Respondent has no registration for the mark "Ltd Commodites" either in whole or in part. The Complainant has found no use of this name on any of the commercial advertising web page of the Respondent.
Furthermore, the Complainant has found no records indicating that the Respondent is involved with any legitimate enterprise under a name identical or confusingly similar to the mark in which the Complainant has its rights. In the absence of any effort by the Respondent to rebut the Complainant�s contentions, the Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied its burden to show no right or legitimate interest of the Respondent�s in the domain name .
Registration and use in bad faith
The Panel finds that the Respondent�s domain name has been registered and used in bad faith. By creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant�s domain name , the Respondent has registered and used the domain name in bad faith under para. 4(b) of the Policy. The Complainant has satisfied its burden to show that Respondent has the intention, for financial gain, to attract Internet users to online advertising and gambling web sites which have no relation to the said domain name. It therefore creates a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant�s mark as the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent's web site and services or goods offered thereon.
7. Decision
For the foregoing reasons, the Panel decides:
� that the domain name registered by Respondent is confusingly similar to the mark in which the Complainant has rights;
� that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
� the domain name has been registered and is being used by the Respondent in bad faith.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complaint should be allowed and the domain name be transferred to the Complainant and so orders BulkR to do so forthwith.
Hugues G. Richard
Sole Panelist
Dated: August 7, 2002
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy