Flyivacations.com

The timeline behind flyivacations.com

Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.

Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.

NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM DECISION Independence Air, Inc. v. Craig McDonald Claim Number: FA0506000493834 PARTIES Complainant is Independence Air, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by James L. Bikoff, of Silverberg Goldman & Bikoff, LLP, 1101 30th St., N.W., Suite 120, Washington, DC 20007. Respondent is Craig McDonald (“Respondent”), 2111 Douglas St., Victoria, British Columbia, v8t, 412, Canada. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <flyivacations.com>, registered with Wild West Domains, Inc. PANEL The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. James A. Carmody, Esq., as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on June 9, 2005; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on June 10, 2005. On June 13, 2005, Wild West Domains, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the domain name <flyivacations.com> is registered with Wild West Domains, Inc. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Wild West Domains, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Wild West Domains, Inc. registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”). On June 14, 2005, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of July 5, 2004 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to postmaster@flyivacations.com by e-mail. A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on July 4, 2005. However, since the Response was not received in hardcopy form, the National Arbitration Forum does not consider the Response to be in compliance with ICANN Rule #5(a). On July 7, 2005, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed James A. Carmody, Esq., as Panelist. RELIEF SOUGHT Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant. PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS A. Complainant makes the following assertions: 1. Respondent’s <flyivacations.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s FLYI mark. 2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <flyivacations.com> domain name. 3. Respondent registered and used the domain name at issue in bad faith. B. Respondent: Respondent did not make a Response in accordance with the Policy, but in his non-conforming submission, he makes clear that he consents to the relief being sought in this proceeding by the Complainant. FINDINGS This is an unopposed proceeding, and Complainant’s allegations are found to be prima facie sufficient to satisfy the elements of the Policy and will be presumed to be true. DISCUSSION In a circumstance such as this, in which Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel decides to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain name. See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat Arb. Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant . . . Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names”). DECISION Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED. Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <flyivacations.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. James A. Carmody, Esq., Panelist Dated: July 18, 2005 Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page. Click Here to return to our Home Page NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM

Source of record: FORUM . Reproduced for research; FORUM is the authoritative source.