{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-100837",
    "time_of_filling": "2014-07-21 10:19:57",
    "domain_names": [
        "milpro.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ZODIAC MILPRO INTERNATIONAL"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Anne Morin)",
    "respondent": [
        "Annapolis Inflatables"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant, Zodiak Milpro International is a manufacturer of inflatable boats.  In 1990 it set up Milpro to focus on military and professional customers.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns the following trade marks:\r\n-- International trade mark No. 1079435 - MILPRO registered 7 April 2011\r\n-- International trademark No. 1134350 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 17 August 2012\r\n-- International trademark No. 1134349 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 17 August 2012\r\n-- International trademark No. 1134348 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 17 August 2012\r\n-- International trademark No. 1126497 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 13 July 13 2012.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns a number of domain names that incorporate the name MILPRO including milpro.fr, zodiacmilpro.us and zodiacmilprostore.com.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name, milpro.com was registered to the Respondent on 15 March 2014.\r\n\r\nOn 28 March 2014 a cease and desist letter was sent to the Respondent regarding the milpro.com domain.  On 29 March 2014 the Respondent replied.  A further email exchange took place on 1 April 2014 and 2 April 2014 between the parties. The Respondent confirmed that it ‘was not interested in turning over or selling the milpro.com domain name’.\r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant submits that:\r\n1.\tThe domain name is identical to the Complainant’s trade mark MILPRO.\r\n\r\n2.\tThe Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the domain name and that:\r\na)\tthe domain name is used to direct Internet users to the Respondent’s website which has no information to show that the website is not an official website of the Complainant;\r\nb)\tthe Respondent displays web content that creates a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant;\r\nc)\tthe domain name suggests a direct relationship with the Complainant rather than to communicate that the Respondent is an inflatable boat store at which one can purchase the Complainant’s products;\r\nd)\tthe Complainant has not authorised the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trade mark MILPRO; and asserts that a dealer has no right to register a domain name consisting of the Complainant’s trade mark.\r\n\r\n3.\tThe domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith and asserts that:\r\na)\tthe domain name contains the Complainant’s trade mark which gives rise to the inference that the Respondent has registered the domain name in order to prevent the Complainant from reflecting its mark in the corresponding domain name;\r\nb)\tthere is a prior relationship between the parties;\r\nc)\tby mentioning the Complainant on some pages of the website, the Respondent creates a risk of confusion with the Complainant and its trade mark; \r\nd)\tthere is a substantial similarity between the website associated with the disputed domain name and the website associated with the right holder’s domain name;\r\ne)\tat the time of the Complaint the website associated with the domain name referred to the MILPRO brand and stated ‘( c ) 2011 Milpro Boats. All Rights reserved’ although the company Milpro Boats does not exist; \r\nf)\tby using the domain name the Respondent is attempting to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to the Respondent’s website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of the Respondent’s website.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Respondent submits that:\r\n1.\tThe domain name is neither identical nor confusingly similar to the protected mark and - \r\na)\tasserts that the Complainant has failed to meet the standard of proof required; and \r\nb)\tdisputes the Complainant’s evidence of confusion. \r\n\r\n2.\tIt has rights and\/or legitimate interest in the domain name: \r\na)\tthe Respondent uses the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services;\r\nb)\tthe domain name was registered before the Complainant’s protected rights and provides evidence of Boyd Tomkies purchase of milpro.com on 28 March 2011;\r\nc)\tthe Respondent uses the milpro.com to advertise ‘its professional line of business and has done so since it became an authorised Zodiac dealer’;\r\nd)\tthe Respondent only sells Zodiac Milpro boats to the military and professional market and offers these for sale on the Milpro website and therefore meets the definition of ‘bona fide’ offering; \r\ne)\tthe website has now been updated so that no confusion is present on the milpro.com site and that the relationship between the Respondent and the Complainant is clearly defined;\r\nf)\tthe Respondent refutes the Complainant’s argument that ‘a retailer must not corner the market in all domain names, thus depriving the trademark owner of reflecting its own mark in a domain name’; and\r\ng)\tthe Respondent asserts it meets all the requirements in Oki Data America, Inc. v. ASD, Inc. WIPO case No.D2001-0903.\r\n\r\n3.\tThe domain name has not been registered and used in bad faith:\r\na)\tthe milpro.com domain name was registered prior to the trade mark right;\r\nb)\tthe Complaint has failed to meet the standard of proof required to show that the domain name has been registered and used in bad faith;\r\nc)\tthe Complainant’s complaints about the milpro.com website have been satisfied and the reference to ‘Milpro Boats’ has been removed;\r\nd)\tthe website terms and conditions page explains the use of the trade marks as well as the relationship between the Respondent and the Complainant; and \r\ne)\tthe Respondent states: ‘Annexes 5.6,7 show improvements made to the website store that refute the arguments made by the Complainant‘.\r\n\r\n",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Domain Name 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 Domain Name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii)of the Policy).",
    "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy).",
    "procedural_factors": "The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Mrs Veronica  Bailey"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2014-08-28 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant owns the following trade marks:\r\n\r\n International trade mark No. 1079435 - MILPRO registered 7 April 2011\r\n International trademark No. 1134350 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 17 August 2012\r\n International trademark No. 1134349 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 17 August 2012\r\n International trademark No. 1134348 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 17 August 2012\r\n International trademark No. 1126497 - ZODIAC MILPRO registered 13 July 13 2012.\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "MILPRO.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}