Careertraining.com

The timeline behind careertraining.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 The Center For Computer Technology, Inc. d/b/a Computer Graphics Training Center v. Domain Listing Agent (NRPDP) Claim Number: FA0506000495379 PARTIES Complainant is The Center For Computer Technology, Inc. d/b/a Computer Graphics Training Center (“Complainant”), represented by Stephen L. Anderson of Anderson & Associates, 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 211, Temecula, CA 92590. Respondent is Domain Listing Agent (NRPDB) (“Respondent”), PO Box 927010, San Diego, CA 92192-7010. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <careertraining.com>, registered with Names4Ever. PANEL The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and that to the best of her knowledge she has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically June 10, 2005; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint June 13, 2005. On June 17, 2005, Names4Ever confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the domain name <careertraining.com> is registered with Names4Ever and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Names4Ever verified that Respondent is bound by the Names4Ever registration agreement and thereby has 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 17, 2005, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of July 7, 2005, 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@careertraining.com by e-mail. Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. On July 12, 2005, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson as Panelist. Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the National Arbitration Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent." Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the National Arbitration Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any Response from Respondent. RELIEF SOUGHT Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant. PARTIES' CONTENTIONS A. Complainant makes the following assertions: 1. The domain name that Respondent registered, <careertraining.com>, is identical to Complainant’s CAREER TRAINING mark. 2. Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the <careertraining.com> domain name. 3. Respondent registered and used the <careertraining.com> domain name in bad faith. B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS Complainant, The Center for Computer Technology, Inc., has used the CAREER TRAINING mark in connection with the offering of educational services as related to computer programming, computer graphics, Internet website design and interior design. Since as early as 1997, Complainant has publicly used and advertised the CAREER TRAINING mark on the Internet and on numerous offline publications. In addition, Complainant has advertised its services in the Verizon yellow pages directory for New York City, Brooklyn and Queens. At a considerable expense, Complainant has also created, published, and distributed more than twenty thousand (20,000) catalogs of graphic and web design class offerings and certificate programs. Complainant alleges that after Complainant’s email account lapsed, without Complainant’s knowledge or consent, Respondent created an email account using the same name as previously used by Complainant for Complainant’s email account. Complainant contends that on or about August 21, 2004, Respondent used this email account to fraudulently transfer the ownership of the <careertraining.com> domain name into Respondent’s name. DISCUSSION Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable." In view of Respondent's failure to submit a Response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and will draw such inferences as the Panel considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc. v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent's failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson, D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) ("In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint."). Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires Complainant to prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and (2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. Procedural Matters This case involves Complainant’s contention that Respondent’s acquisition of the <careertraining.com> domain name was by fraud or theft. However, the Policy was established with the purpose of curtailing abusive domain name registrations, an activity known as “cybersquatting,” which involves registering and using a domain name in order to attempt to benefit from a trademark holder’s rights in a mark that corresponds to the domain name. This case potentially involves a fraudulent registration transfer, which is likely a dispute that should be determined in a court of law. Thus, the Panel finds that this case is outside the scope of the Policy. See Decker v. Antwer, FA 263584 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 28, 2004) (“[S]ince the instant case does not involve the practice of cybersquatting and is more accurately described as a fraudulent registration transfer, the Panel finds that this dispute may be more suitable in a court of law as it exceeds the scope of the Policy.”); see also Commercial Publ’g Co. v. EarthComm., Inc., FA 95013 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 20, 2000) (stating that the Policy’s administrative procedure is “intended only for the relatively narrow class of cases of ‘abusive registrations.’” Cases where registered domain names are subject to legitimate disputes are relegated to the courts). DECISION Having failed to establish all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be DENIED. Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson, Panelist Dated: July 22, 2005 Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page. Click Here to return to our Home Page

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