84lumber.cam

The timeline behind 84lumber.cam

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 84 IP, LLC v. Meagan Hagerman Claim Number: FA2601002198391 PARTIES Complainant is 84 IP, LLC ("Complainant"), represented by Susan Meyer of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Meagan Hagerman ("Respondent"), Washington, USA. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <84lumber.cam>, registered with Spaceship, Inc. PANEL The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Nick J. Gardner as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on January 7, 2026; Forum received payment on January 7, 2026. On January 8, 2026, Spaceship, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <84lumber.cam> domain name is registered with Spaceship, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Spaceship, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Spaceship, Inc. 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 January 12, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 2, 2026 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@84lumber.cam. Also on January 12, 2026, 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 February 3, 2026, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Nick J. Gardner 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 asserts rights in the "84 LUMBER" trademark and the "84" mark through multiple United States trademark registrations dating from 2006 to 2017, covering various goods and services related to its building materials business. Complainant operates as the nation's largest privately held supplier of building materials, with 320 facilities in 34 states and approximately 7,000 employees. Complainant has continuously used the 84 LUMBER mark in commerce since 1956 in connection with retail outlets, building supplies, construction services, and related activities. It also promotes its business via its website at www.84lumber.com Complainant contends that the disputed domain name <84lumber.cam> is confusingly similar, if not identical, to its 84 LUMBER registered trademark. The domain name wholly incorporates Complainant's mark with only the addition of the ".cam" top-level domain, which is insufficient to distinguish the domain name from the mark. Complainant argues that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the name "84 Lumber," has no authorization from Complainant to use the mark, and is not making any bona fide offering of goods or services. The domain name currently resolves to a broken link and does not display any active content, indicating no legitimate use. Complainant asserts that the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. Given the fame and distinctiveness of the 84 LUMBER mark in the building materials industry, Respondent must have had actual or constructive knowledge of Complainant's rights at the time of registration. The passive holding of the domain name with a broken link, combined with the lack of any plausible good faith use for a domain incorporating Complainant's distinctive mark, constitutes bad faith registration and use. Complainant contends that the registration appears designed to impersonate Complainant or create confusion regarding affiliation with Complainant's business. B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS Based on the submissions and evidence in the record, the Panel finds as follows: 1. Complainant operates a substantial building materials supply business under the 84 LUMBER mark, which it has used continuously since 1956. 2. Complainant owns multiple valid and subsisting United States trademark registrations for 84 LUMBER and the "84" mark (both word and design marks), with registrations dating from February 28, 2006 to December 12, 2017, covering a wide range of goods and services in the building materials and construction industry. See for example US registration no 4631515 for the term 84 LUMBER registered on October 4, 2014. 3. Complainant operates 320 facilities in 34 states, employs approximately 7,000 individuals, and maintains an active commercial website at www.84lumber.com. 4. The disputed domain name <84lumber.cam> was registered by Respondent on July 21, 2025 5. The disputed domain name does not resolve to an active website. 6. Respondent has not been authorized by Complainant to use the 84 LUMBER mark or to register any domain name incorporating that mark. 7. There is no evidence in the WHOIS record or otherwise that Respondent is commonly known by the name "84 Lumber" or has any connection to that name. 8. Respondent has not filed a Response or otherwise participated in this proceeding to explain any legitimate basis for the registration. DISCUSSION Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and 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 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. 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 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 The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied the threshold requirement of demonstrating rights in the 84 LUMBER mark for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy – see Farmlane Brands, LLC v. Helene Isbell Biggane, FA 1996757 (Forum July 12, 2022) ("Ownership of a trademark registration is generally sufficient evidence that a complainant has the requisite rights in a mark for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy."). The disputed domain name <84lumber.cam> incorporates Complainant's entire 84 LUMBER mark with the omission of the space between "84" and "lumber" noting that spaces cannot form part of a domain name in any event. The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's 84 LUMBER mark. See Gurney's Inn Resort & Spa Ltd. v. Whitney, FA 140656 (Forum Feb. 19, 2003) ("Punctuation and spaces between words are not significant in determining the similarity of a domain name and a mark because punctuation and spaces are not reproducible in a domain name."). The addition of the top-level domain ".cam" is a technical requirement of domain name registration and does not affect the confusing similarity analysis. See Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association v. Shi Lei aka Shilei, FA 1784643 (Forum June 18, 2018) ("A TLD (whether a gTLD, sTLD or ccTLD) is disregarded under a Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis because domain name syntax requires TLDs."). The Panel finds that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). Rights or Legitimate Interests Under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), it is now well established that the Complainant must first make a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) and that, if the prima facie case is made out, the burden then shifts to the Respondent to show that it does have such rights or legitimate interests. See Advanced International Marketing Corporation v. AA-1 Corp, FA 780200 (Forum Nov. 2, 2011) (finding that a complainant must offer some evidence to make its prima facie case and satisfy Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii)). Complainant has demonstrated that Respondent is not authorized to use the 84 LUMBER trademark and has no relationship with Complainant. The Registrar disclosure identifies Respondent as "Meagan Hagerman" which bears no resemblance to the disputed domain name. There is no evidence that Respondent has been commonly known by the disputed domain name or has acquired any trademark rights in "84 LUMBER " or any similar term. Accordingly, Complainant has established a prima facie case under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), and the burden shifts to Respondent to demonstrate rights or legitimate interests. Respondent has failed to respond and therefore has failed to demonstrate any rights or legitimate interests. The Panel finds that Respondent is not making a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i). The disputed domain name does not resolve to any active website. The Panel finds that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). Respondent is identified as "Meagan Hagerman" in the WHOIS information, and there is no evidence that Respondent has been commonly known by "84 LUMBER" or any variation thereof. Respondent's unauthorized use of Complainant's mark supports a lack of rights or legitimate interests. See Solstice Marketing Corp. v. Marc Salkovitz d/b/a Image Media, LLC, FA 040087 (Forum Aug. 31, 2007) (respondent not commonly known by disputed domain name because respondent lacked authorization to use complainant's registered service mark). The Panel finds that Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). The passive holding of a domain name does not constitute legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Respondent has failed to rebut Complainant's prima facie case or to demonstrate any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Panel finds that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Registration and Use in Bad Faith Policy ¶ 4(b) sets forth four non-exclusive circumstances that constitute evidence of registration and use in bad faith. It is not possible to determine whether any of these are applicable to the facts of the present case. However the list is non exhaustive. The 84 LUMBER trademark is so obviously connected with Complainant that Respondent's registration and use of the confusingly similar disputed domain name strongly supports a finding of bad faith. It is not possible to conceive of a good faith use of the domain name (absent consent from the Complainant). The fact that the domain name has not been used and is passively held does not alter this analysis – see Bridgewater Associates, LP v. hamza hamed, FA 1894223 (Forum June 9, 2020) ("The fame of Complainant's mark and the lack of evidence of legitimate use and bona fide offering of goods and services by Respondent are the factors that, inter alia, support finding of passive holding as constituting bad faith registration and use".). See also Coachella Music Festival, LLC v. Mike Gau, FA 1878581 (Forum Jan. 16, 2020) ("The overriding objective of the Policy is to curb the abusive registration of domain names in circumstances where the registrant seeks to profit from or exploit the trade mark of another. Passive holding of a domain name containing a mark with a reputation can be bad faith registration and use."). See also WIPO Overview 3.0 at ¶3.3. "Can the "passive holding" or non-use of a domain name support a finding of bad faith? From the inception of the UDRP, panelists have found that the non-use of a domain name (including a blank or "coming soon" page) would not prevent a finding of bad faith under the doctrine of passive holding. While panelists will look at the totality of the circumstances in each case, factors that have been considered relevant in applying the passive holding doctrine include: (i) the degree of distinctiveness or reputation of the complainant's mark, (ii) the failure of the respondent to submit a response or to provide any evidence of actual or contemplated good-faith use, (iii) the respondent's concealing its identity or use of false contact details (noted to be in breach of its registration agreement), and (iv) the implausibility of any good faith use to which the domain name may be put". At least factors (i), (ii) and (iv) apply in the present case. The Panel finds that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). 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 <84lumber.cam> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Nick J. Gardner Panelist Dated: February 4, 2026 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.