DECISION Volvo Trademark Holding AB v Brendan Conboy Case No D2011-0558 1 The Parties The Complainant is Volvo Trademark Holding AB of Goteborg Sweden represented by Sughrue Mion PLLC United States of America The Respondent is Brendan Conboy

PANEL DECISION Grundfos Holding A/S v Sergey M Doubovitskiy Case No D2011-0346 1 The Parties Complainant is Grundfos Holding A/S of Bjerringbro Denmark represented by Kromann Reumert Denmark Respondent is Sergey M Doubovitskiy of Moscow

considers that Respondent s passive use of the disputed domain name may be deemed a bad faith behavior The passive use held by Respondent must be considered bad faith in the present case In this case the passive holding of the disputed domain

contact the trademark holder passive holding does not as such prevent a finding of bad faith Paragraph 3.2 The WIPO Overview 2.0 further stated The panel must examine all the circumstances of the case to determine whether the respondent is acting

faith Respondent is currently holding the names hostage as a grudge against Complainant Respondent was well aware of Complainant s rights in the RUMBA ROOM mark which is further evidence of Respondent s bad faith actions Moreover Respondent s

4 a ii and iv Respondent s passive holding of a domain name incorporating Complainant s trademarks causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the famous ATLAS SHRUGGED mark by lessening the capacity of Complainant to identify and distinguish

to the WIPO Overview 2.0 passive holding does not as such prevent a finding of bad faith Paragraph 3.2 The Panel notes that the front page of the Respondent s web site to which the disputed domain name resolved accuses the Complainant of

merely held the domain name passively Such passive holding supports a finding of bad faith registration and use B Respondent The disputed domain name viking.org was originally registered on August 10 1997 by Natasha Flaherty deceased husband Paul

Complainant contends that the passive holding of the Disputed Domain Name should be regarded as evidence of bad faith as Complainant has no control over its content and it prevents Complainant from registering and using it in the future Complainant

only positive action but also passive holding see the landmark case Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows WIPO Case No D2000-0003 As an additional circumstance evidencing bad faith the Panel notes that there has been no Response and in

non use of the domain name is passive holding meant to prevent from anyone including trademarks owners to be able to register the domain name medicalexpo.com and use a corresponding domain name This passive holding for 14 years prevents the

D2003-0527 WIPO Oct 2 2003 holding that the UDRP does not require a complainant to have registered its trademark prior to the respondent s registration of the domain name under Policy Paragraph 4 a i but may prevent a finding of bad faith under

that this is a case of passive holding which also constitutes bad faith The Panel finds that the evidence submitted by Complainant makes out a strong case that the Respondent both registered and is using the domain name in bad faith That is

active website Respondent s passive holding of the domain name is evidence that it does not have rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name pursuant to Policy Paragraph 4 a ii See Pharmacia & Upjohn AB v Romero D2000-1273 WIPO Nov 13

other words such a long-term passive holding of the disputed domain name can only be interpreted as bad faith registration b The Respondent s undisputed offer to sell the disputed domain name for an exorbitant sum combined with a long-time

v Hogan NAF FA0312000220042 holding respondent s passive holding of the domain names constitutes bad faith and stating The Panel will not wait until the domain names have actually been used before finding bad faith because it is inconceivable

Nat Arb Forum Mar 13 2009 holding the addition of generic terms to a famous mark is insufficient to diminish the confusingly similar nature of the domain re googlevideodownload.com Google Inc v Babaian FA 1060992 Nat Arb Forum Oct 1 2007

show that the Respondent s passive holding amounts to acting in bad faith The Respondent has registered more than 90 domain names Significantly this list contains infringing registrations that include craftsman.tv and corvetteleasing.com as

The Panel finds that such passive holding of the disputed domain name constitutes bad faith use and registration under Policy Paragraph 4 a iii See Telstra Corp v Nuclear Marshmallows D2000-0003 WIPO Feb 18 2000 I t is possible in certain

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