full complaint - Domain Name Wire

[c.]UDRP Rule 3(b)(ix)(3); UDRP Policy 4(a)(iii).[i.] There is clear evidence that RESPONDENT has registered or hasacquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, orotherwise transferring the domain name registration to the Complainant who is theowner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that Complainant.[ii.] RESPONDENT is a domain reseller, reselling this andthousands of other other domains. OVERUS is merely one of many that are part ofRESPONDENT's portfolio. See Annexation D, " Current Domain NameResolution." There the domain is being resold through "usdots.com," and the usermay make an offer directly on the Web page.[iii.] According to the "Registrar History" report fromdomainresearch.org (Annexation [D]), overus.com domain name was registered toCOMDots.com years after the OVERUS emblem was registered and used incommerce(1) Aug 29th, 2011, the name was registered to "namage.com"(Page 18).(2) October 10th, 2011, the domain name is first shown asregistered to "COMDots.com"Dynadot on January 14th, 2013. This is[ii.] RESPONDENT's registration of this domain name effectivelyprevents COMPLAINTANT (the owner of the trademark) from reflecting the markin a corresponding domain name. This disrupts business, as customers seeking theOVERUS® trademark and/or The OVerus Organization will be directed to anunrelated and confusingly similar site.[iii.] It is clear that RESPONDENT's use of overus.com is intendedto (and actually does) confuse and misdirect customers seeking The OVerusOrganization and/or the OVERUS certification mark. This activity is actionableunder federal law and causes RESPONDENT to be liable to COMPLAINTANTand The OVerus Organization in every state in which RESPONDENT has madesales. REPONDENT's activites are unlawful and constitute unfair competition,intentional trademark infringement, trademark dilution, false destination of origin,and cybersquatting.UDRPModelComplaint.rtf