Decisión del Panel Administrativo nº D2019-0229 of Tribunal Arbitral de la OMPI, April 05, 2019 (case Tambour Ltd v. Alexander Lerman)

Defense:Alexander Lerman / PRIVACYDOTLINK CUSTOMER 914354
Resolution Date:April 05, 2019
Issuing Organization:Tribunal Arbitral de la OMPI
Decision:Complaint denied
Dominio:Generic Domains



WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center


Tambour Ltd v. Alexander Lerman

Case No. D2019-0229

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Tambour Ltd of Kfar Neter, Israel, represented by Preminger & Co, Israel.

The Respondent is Alexander Lerman of Berkley, California, United States of America (“United States”), represented by John Berryhill, Ph.d., Esq., United States.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name [] is registered with Uniregistrar Corp (the “Registrar”).

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on January 30, 2019. On January 30, 2019, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On January 31, 2019, 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 on February 1, 2019, 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 February 4, 2019.

The Center verified that thе 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 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on February 6, 2019. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was February 26, 2019. Pursuant to paragraph 5(b) of the Rules, the Center received a request by the Respondent for a four-day extension to the Response filing timeline. The Response was filed with the Center on March 3, 2019.

The Center appointed Assen Alexiev, Jonathan Agmon, and Tony Willoughby as panelists in this matter on March 22, 2019. 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 is an Israeli company established in 1936 under the name Tambour Ltd. It operates six factories in Israel in Akko, Askar, Ashkelon, Kibbutz Gesher, and Migdal Ha’emek, which produce decorative paint products and exterior coating, metal paints and industry paints, gypsum boards and blocks, metal studs, emulsions, construction products, construction and infrastructure accessories, glues, sealants and inks, plaster and gypsum-based construction products, electrostatic powders for advanced dyeing of aluminum and metals.

The Complainant is the owner of the following trademark registrations for “Tambour” (the “TAMBOUR trademark”):

- the trademark TAMBOUR with registration No. 278543, registered as of February 3, 2016, for goods in International Class 2;

- the trademark TAMBOUR with registration number IV/17198/2015, registered in Myanmar on January 12, 2016, for goods in International Class 2; and

- the International trademark TAMBOUR with registration No. 1275532, registered on October 21, 2015, for goods in International Class 2.

The official website of the Complainant is located at the domain name [].

The disputed domain name was registered on March 12, 2005. It resolves to a landing page containing an invitation to interested parties to buy the disputed domain name.

5. Parties’ Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant submits that it is the biggest paint manufacturer in Israel and one of the leading in the world with branches and sales all over the world and in 4 continents.

According to the Complainant, the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s TAMBOUR trademark.

The Complainant asserts that the Respondent does not have rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not affiliated to the Complainant, is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, and does not have any trademark rights in it. The Respondent is...

To continue reading