Alexaholic.com

The timeline behind alexaholic.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 Alexa Internet v. Alexaholic.com c/o Ron Hornbaker Claim Number: FA0702000924564 PARTIES Complainant is Alexa Internet (“Complainant”), represented by James E. Geringer, of Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, One World Trade Center, Suite 1600, 121 SW Salmon Street, Portland, OR 97204, USA. Respondent is Alexaholic.com c/o Ron Hornbaker (“Respondent”), 1627 Main St., GSI Suite 100, Kansas City 64108. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <alexaholic.com>, registered with Enom, Inc. PANEL The undersigned certify that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in serving as Panelists in this proceeding. Anne M. Wallace and Terry F. Peppard as Panelists and Honorable Karl V. Fink (Ret.) as Chair. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on February 23, 2007; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on February 26, 2007. On February 26, 2007, Enom, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <alexaholic.com> domain name is registered with Enom, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Enom, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Enom, 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 March 5, 2007, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of March 26, 2007 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@alexaholic.com by e-mail. On March 26, 2007, Respondent requested, pursuant to Supplemental Rule 6, an extension of 20 days to respond to the Complaint due to extenuating circumstances. Complainant did not consent to this extension. On March 27, 2007, the National Arbitration Forum, without Complainant’s consent, granted Respondent an extension of 10 days and set a new deadline of April 5, 2007 for a filing of a Response. Respondent did not submit a Response. On April 10, 2007, the National Arbitration Forum received an Additional Submission from Respondent and found it to be timely and complete pursuant to Supplemental Rule 7. On April 13, 2007, the National Arbitration Forum received an Additional Submission from Complainant and found it to be timely and complete pursuant to Supplemental Rule 7. On April 17, 2007, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a three-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Anne M. Wallace and Terry F. Peppard as Panelists and Honorable Karl V. Fink (Ret.) as Chair 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 <alexaholic.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s ALEXA mark. 2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <alexaholic.com> domain name. 3. Respondent registered and used the <alexaholic.com> domain name in bad faith. B. Respondent denies Complainant’s assertions and asserts Complainant cannot prove it is entitled to the relief requested. In its Additional Submission, Respondent requests that the Panel dismiss this proceeding until the court makes a final decision. DISCUSSION After filing this Complaint on March 22, 2007, Complainant filed an action against Respondent in the United States District Court for the Northern Division of California seeking an injunction against Respondent’s use of Complainant’s trademarks, as well as damages. Complainant alleges violations of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (“ACPA”), 15 U.S.C.§ 1125(d), and the California Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 (unfair competition), and makes common law and state law claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and unfair competition. Complainant also seeks the transfer of the <alexaholic.com> domain name in that action as well. FINDINGS Rule 18 of the Policy provides in pertinent part: Effect of Court Proceedings (a) In the event of any legal proceedings initiated prior to or during an administrative proceeding in respect of a domain-name dispute that is the subject of the complaint, the Panel shall have the discretion to decide whether to suspend or terminate the administrative proceeding, or to proceed to a decision. Applying Rule 18, the Panel finds this matter should not be decided until the court proceeding is resolved. See AmeriPlan Corp. v. Gilbert, FA 105737 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 22, 2002) (finding that Policy ¶ 4(k) requires that ICANN not implement an administrative panel’s decision regarding a UDRP dispute until the court proceeding is resolved and therefore, a panel should not rule on a decision when there is a court proceeding pending because no purpose is served by the panel rendering a decision on the merits to transfer the domain name, or have it remain, when a decision regarding the domain name will have no practical consequence); see also Lutton Invs., Inc. v. Darkhorse Distrib., Inc., FA 154142 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 4, 2003) (stating that “[t]he pending arbitration between the parties to this dispute, touching on matters directly relevant to the resolution of a claim under the UDRP, justifies terminating the present administrative proceeding” and dismissing the complaint without prejudice). DECISION Accordingly, the Panel orders that the Complaint be and hereby is DISMISSED without prejudice to Complainant bringing a further proceeding in the event the pending court action does not resolve the dispute over the domain name. Honorable Karl V. Fink (Ret.), Chair For the Panel Anne M. Wallace, Panelist Terry F. Peppard, Panelist Dated: April 30, 2007 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.