Aforadleymerch.net

The timeline behind aforadleymerch.net

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 Shonduras, Inc. v. Rod Diaz Claim Number: FA2502002140314 PARTIES Complainant is Shonduras, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Joshua T. English of Bochner PLLC, New York, USA. Respondent is Rod Diaz ("Respondent"), California, USA. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <aforadleymerch.net>, registered with Web Commerce Communications Limited dba WebNic.cc. 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. Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on February 14, 2025. Forum received payment on February 14, 2025. On February 17, 2025, Web Commerce Communications Limited dba WebNic.cc confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <aforadleymerch.net> domain name is registered with Web Commerce Communications Limited dba WebNic.cc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Web Commerce Communications Limited dba WebNic.cc has verified that Respondent is bound by the Web Commerce Communications Limited dba WebNic.cc registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy"). On February 21, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 13, 2025 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@aforadleymerch.net. Also on February 21, 2025, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts. Having received no response from Respondent, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. On March 14, 2025, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury as Panelist. Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that 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" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, 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 Complainant, Shonduras, Inc., has offered goods under the trademark A FOR ADLEY since at least as early as October 2017, including beach towels, swimsuits, clothing for children, stuffed toy animals and water toys. Complainant has rights in the A FOR ADLEY mark through registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO"). Complainant operates the "www.aforadley.com" website through which its goods are offered. Respondent's <aforadleymerch.net> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's A FOR ADLEY mark. Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <aforadleymerch.net> domain name. A FOR ADLEY is an arbitrary term which has no meaning outside its use as a means to identify Complainant as a source of certain products and services. Respondent is not a licensee of Complainant nor is Respondent otherwise authorized to use Complainant's A FOR ADLEY mark for any purpose. Upon information and belief, Respondent is not commonly known as "A FOR ADLEY," "A FOR ADLEY MERCH," or "AFORADLEYMERCH.NET." Respondent does not use the domain name for any bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, the domain name currently resolves to a counterfeit "A FOR ADLEY" online storefront selling, upon information and belief, counterfeit "A FOR ADLEY" goods. Respondent registered the <aforadleymerch.net> domain name in bad faith with actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in the A FOR ADLEY mark and uses it in bad faith to direct users to a counterfeit storefront fraudulently leading customers to believe they are buying authentic goods directly from Complainant, or that Respondent is sponsored, affiliated, or endorsed by Complainant. B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief. 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." Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that the domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (i) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and (ii) 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. 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(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences as it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint. However, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) ('Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint'). Identical and/or Confusingly Similar Complainant has shown that it has rights in the A FOR ADLEY mark through registration with the USPTO (Reg. No. 7,093,359, registered on June 27, 2023). It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. The standing (or threshold) test for confusing similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightforward comparison between the Complainant's trademark and the disputed domain name. WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition ("WIPO Overview 3.0 "), section 1.7. The Panel finds Respondent's <aforadleymerch.net> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant's A FOR ADLEY mark, only differing by the omission of the spaces between the words and the addition of the word "merch", which is insufficient to distinguish the domain name from Complainant's mark and instead evokes Complainant's business. The inconsequential ".net" generic top-level domain ("gTLD") may be ignored under this element. See, for example, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, WIPO Case No. D2000-0429. Complainant has established this element. Rights or Legitimate Interests Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy sets out three illustrative circumstances as examples which, if established by Respondent, shall demonstrate rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy, i.e. (i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or (ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or (iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue. The <aforadleymerch.net> domain name was registered on April 2, 2024 many years after the registration of Complainant's mark. It resolves to a website prominently displaying Complainant's A FOR ADLEY mark and offering for sale numerous items of clothing bearing the A FOR ADLEY mark at what appear to be discounted prices. These circumstances, together with Complainant's assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <aforadleymerch.net> domain name. See JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Dryx Emerson / KMF Events LTD, FA 1849706 (Forum July 17, 2019). Respondent has made no attempt to do so. The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name. Complainant has established this element. Registration and Use in Bad Faith Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy is expressed in the conjunctive: "the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith". Paragraph 4(b) of the Policy sets out four illustrative circumstances, which, though not exclusive, shall be evidence of the registration and use of the domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, including: (iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location. The circumstances set out above in relation to the second element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant and its A FOR ADLEY mark when Respondent registered the <aforadleymerch.net> domain name and that Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent's website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's website and of the products promoted on that website. This demonstrates registration and use in bad faith to attract users for commercial gain under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). Complainant has established this element. DECISION Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED. Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <aforadleymerch.net> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Alan L. Limbury, Panelist Dated: March 17, 2025 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.