Decisión del Panel Administrativo nº D2015-1230 of WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, September 28, 2015 (case Bounz B.V. v. Whois Privacy Services Pty Ltd. / Stanley Pace)

Resolution DateSeptember 28, 2015
Issuing OrganizationWIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
DecisionComplaint denied
DominioGeneric Domains

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

Bounz B.V. v. Whois Privacy Services Pty Ltd. / Stanley Pace

Case No. D2015-1230

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Bounz B.V. of Badhoevedorp, the Netherlands, represented by Muller & Eilbracht B.V., the Netherlands.

The Respondent is Whois Privacy Services Pty Ltd. of Queensland, Australia / Stanley Pace of Texas, United States of America, represented by Law Office of Howard M. Neu, United States of America.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name [bounz.com] is registered with Fabulous.com (the “Registrar”).

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on July 16, 2015. On July 16, 2015, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On July 17, 2015, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the disputed domain name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant July 20, 2015 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amended Complaint on July 21, 2015.

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced July 24, 2015. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was August 13, 2015. The Response was filed with the Center on August 13, 2015.

The Center appointed Alistair Payne, Willem J. H. Leppink and Richard G. Lyon as panelists in this matter on September 15, 2015. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. Each member of the Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.

4. Factual Background

The Complainant produces and services high quality trampolines and designs and implements trampoline courts. It also operates a business that offers various services including ways of combining exercise sports and entertainment, with a focus on gymnastics and trampoline jumping. The Complainant has franchised its concept and operates in various locations in the Netherlands and each year also operates for a period in Belgium. The Complainant commenced its business in 2010 under the BOUNZ mark and opened its first location in 2011. It owns various trade mark registrations for, or that incorporate, the word mark BOUNZ...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT