{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103278", "time_of_filling": "2020-09-17 15:52:32", "domain_names": [ "pepsicog.com", "pepsicogd.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "PepsiCo, Inc." ], "complainant_representative": "RiskIQ, Inc. c\/o Jonathan Matkowsky", "respondent": [ "Terry Khan" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "COMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is one of the world's most iconic and recognized consumer brands globally. It was founded in 1898 and has become a leading supplier of food and beverage products, including its flagship PEPSI soft drinks which were created in 1911. Products produced by the Complainant are enjoyed by consumers more than one billion times a day in more than 200 countries and territories around the world. The Complainant also owns numerous registrations for its PEPSI and PEPSICO trademarks, both in standard characters as well as with design elements covering a variety of food and beverage products as well as related goods. Widespread recognition and numerous awards and honors have been enjoyed and bestowed upon the Complainant.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was created on October 30, 2019 and the domain name was created on August 10, 2020. Neither of these domain names resolve to any website content. However, a phishing email was sent to one of the Complainant’s suppliers using an address that incorporates the domain name. \r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has not filed a response or made any other submission in this case.\r\n", "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain names.", "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.", "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that each of the disputed domain names is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy). ", "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).", "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy).", "procedural_factors": "Multiple Respondents\r\n\r\nThe Whois records for the two disputed domain names identify different registrant names. However, the Complainant names these two registrants as the Respondents in this proceeding and requests that the domain names and the named Respondents be consolidated in a single UDRP proceeding. \r\n \r\nParagraph 4(f) of the Policy provides that “[i]n the event of multiple disputes between [a respondent] and a complainant, either [the respondent] or the complainant may petition to consolidate the disputes before a single Administrative Panel….” This is allowed where it “promotes the shared interests of the parties in avoiding unnecessary duplication of time, effort and expense, reduces the potential for conflicting or inconsistent results arising from multiple proceedings, and generally furthers the fundamental objectives of the Policy.” See, e.g., MLB Advanced Media, The Phillies, Padres LP v. OreNet, Inc., D2009-0985 (WIPO Sep. 28, 2009). Further, paragraph 3(c) of the Rules provides that “[t]he complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain-name holder.” UDRP Panels have looked to a variety of factors in determining whether multiple domain names are, in fact, of common ownership. WIPO Overview 3.0 at par. 4.11.2. Such factors as similarities in the Whois information and similar naming conventions in the disputed domain names, etc. may lead to the conclusion that domain names with some differing registrant names are, nevertheless, owned by a single entity. See, e.g., Delta Dental Plans Association v. ICS INC., et al., D2014-0474 (WIPO June 16, 2014) (Consolidation of 31 domains allowed where “[t]he Panel notes that each of the disputed domain names follows an identical naming convention, namely (DELTA DENTAL marks+ of + state name or two-letter state abbreviation); (“while the names of the registrants of the Domain Names are different”, consolidation allowed where “[t]he Domain Names have a ‘quasi identical structure’” and “[b]oth registrants email addresses include the term ‘gamester’ before the ‘@’ symbol.”).\r\n\r\nIn the present case, the Registrant of the domain name is listed as Terry Khan, and the registrant of the domain name is listed as Rene Lammers. However, the Whois records for both of the disputed domain names identify nearly identical email addresses for their Registrants and list the Complainant’s own corporate name and business address in the relevant fields. Further, both of the disputed domain names use a similar naming pattern of adding one or two letters to the Complainant’s PEPSICO trademark. In view of these similarities between the disputed domain names the Panel finds it highly likely that both of them are owned by the same person. Thus, by a preponderance of the evidence presented, the Panel finds sufficient grounds to conclude that it would be equitable and procedurally efficient to permit the consolidation of the two disputed domain names into this single case.\r\n\r\nThe Panel is satisfied that all other procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Steven M. Levy, Esq." ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-10-20 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant claims ownership of over 900 active trademark registrations for PEPSI-variant marks including the following:\r\n\r\n-\tPEPSI, United States of America Trademark Registration No. 824,150, dated February 14, 1967, in Class 32;\r\n\r\n-\tPEPSICO (& DESIGN), United States of America Trademark Registration No. 3026568, dated December 13, 2005, Classes 16, 18, and 25;\r\n\r\n-\tPEPSICO, Mexico Trademark Registration No. 950496, dated August 29, 2006, in Class 32;\r\n\r\n-\tPEPSICO (& Design), European Union Trademark Registration No. 013357637, dated March 13, 2015, Classes 16, 29, 30, 32, 35, 36, and 41; ", "decision_domains": { "PEPSICOG.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "PEPSICOGD.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }