A) Confusing similarity
The Panel agrees with the Complainant's assertions that the addition of the descriptive term, “aligner”, does not prevent the disputed domain name from being confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks.
B) Lack of legitimate rights or interests
The disputed domain name is a distinctive, non-descriptive name. It is unlikely that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name without having the Complainant firmly in mind. The Complainant’s assertions that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant are sufficient to constitute a prima facie demonstration of absence of rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name on the part of the Respondent. The burden of evidence therefore shifts to the Respondent to show, using tangible evidence, that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent has made no attempt to do so.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
C) Registered or Used in Bad Faith
The Complainant gives sound bases for its contention that the disputed domain name was registered and has been used in bad faith.
Firstly, owing to the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademarks and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademarks, and so the Panel finds on the balance of probabilities that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant’s trademarks when registering the disputed domain name.
Secondly, the Panel accepts the Complainant’s unchallenged assertion that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with the aim of creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademarks.
Thirdly, it appears from the document provided by the Complainant that the Respondent is using the disputed domain name to resolve to an active website displaying the trademarks of the Complainant and suggesting endorsement and/or sponsorship.
Fourthly, the Respondent has not responded to nor denied any of the assertions made by the Complainant in the cease and desist letter and in this proceeding.
|