официальный сайт ВОИС
Для удобства навигации:
Перейти в начало каталога
Дела по доменам общего пользования
Дела по национальным доменам
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Citigroup, Inc v. Party Night Inc. aka Peter Carrington
Case No. D2003-0480
1. The Parties
The Complainant is Citigroup, Inc, a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in New York, United States of America, represented by Haynes and Boone, LLP, United States of America.
The Respondent is Party Night Inc. aka Peter Carrington, with addresses in Amsterdam, The Netherlands and Geneva, Switzerland.
2. The Domain Names and Registrars
There are two domain names at issue.
The disputed domain name <citifiancial.com> is registered with Key-Systems GmbH dba domaindiscount24.com.
The disputed domain name <arcadiafinacial.com> is registered with CSL Computer Service Langenbach GmbH dba Joker.com.
3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on June 20, 2003. On June 23, 2003, the Center transmitted by email to Key-Systems GmbH dba domaindiscount24.com and to CSL Computer Service Langenbach GmbH dba Joker.com requests for registrar verification in connection with the domain names at issue. On June 23, 2003, Key-Systems GmbH dba domaindiscount24.com and CSL Computer Service Langenbach GmbH dba Joker.com transmitted by email to the Center their verification responses confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details for the administrative, billing, and technical contact. In response to a notification by the Center that the Complaint was administratively deficient, the Complainant filed an amendment to the Complaint on July 3, 2003. The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy"), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules"), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Supplemental Rules").
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on July 9, 2003. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was July 29, 2003. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on July 31, 2003.
The Center appointed George R. F. Souter as the Sole Panelist in this matter on August 8, 2003. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.
4. Factual Background
The Complainant states that it was formed in 1998, by the merger of Travelers and Citicorp, and is the world’s largest financial services firm and the largest US-based bank holding company, with over $ (US) 1 trillion in assets, over 270,000 employees around the world, and managing customer accounts across six continents in more than 100 countries.
of the Panel
Inc v. Ian
to the satisfaction
of the Panel
of its "CITI-prefixed
and to a
In the present
of a number
of its trademark
The Complainant, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Citibank NA, operates websites under the domain names <citifinancial.com>, <citifinancial.net>, <citifinancial.biz>.
In connection with the Complaint for <arcadiafinacial.com>, the Complainant has provided the Panel with a certified copy of US trademark registration No 1816141, of the trademark ARCADIA FINANCIAL LTD (and device), registered in 1994, claiming first use in commerce in 1992, owned by its wholly-owned subsidiary, Arcadia Financial Ltd. The Complainant avers that Arcadia Financial Ltd is "the largest indirect automobile lending institution in the United States, providing auto financing for over 100,000 franchised and independent auto dealers in 46 states and servicing active loans valuing approximately $5 billion with over 450,000 customers."
The Complainant, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Citibank NA, operates a website under the domain name <arcadiafinancial.com>.
The Complainant alleges that the domain names at issue are used to operate websites with sexually explicit content, and has provided proof of such usage.
The Complainant contends that the domain names at issue are virtually identical and confusingly similar to the Complainant’s well known marks, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in either domain name, and that the Respondent is "a notorious and serial typosquatter who has engaged in a pattern of bad faith registration by knowingly registering …domain names, confusingly similar or identical to distinctive or famous marks", and that, accordingly, the domain names at issue have been registered and used in bad faith.
to his porn
and to deceive
Case No. D2002-0827."
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
Paragraph 4(a) of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy lists three tests which a Complainant must satisfy in order to succeed:
(i) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
(ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
(i) Identical or Confusingly Similar
The panel is satisfied that the Complainant has protectable trademark rights through registration and reputation in connection with both trademarks CITIFINANCIAL and ARCADIA FINANCIAL.
It is well-established
in the case
with a Complainant’s
SA v. Peter
and so decides
(ii) Rights or Legitimate Interests
to him under
of the domain
to be no
to the Respondent’s
to the Respondent
by the knowledge
been a frequent
SA v. Peter
and in each
had no rights
in the domain
(iii) Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The third test is, in reality, a dual test, requiring the Panel to be satisfied both that the domain names have been registered in bad faith and used in bad faith.
SA v. Peter
is an illustration
of the Respondent’s
in bad faith
on the specific
at the same
he is in
of the Panel
by the Complainant
of the Respondent
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain names, <citifiancial.com> and <arcadiafinacial.com> be transferred to the Complainant.
George R. F. Souter
Dated: August 22, 2003