The disputed domain name appears to have originally registered on November 26, 2013 by TravelScape, LLC d/b/a Travel Now, many years after the adoption and first use of the VICEROY trademark. WIPO Case No. WIPO Case No. See, Educational Testing Service v. TOEFL, GEMS Menasa (Cayman) Limited Entity with Fitch Analyst Adjusted Financials as featured on Fitch Ratings. D2004-0487 where the panel stated“A number of WIPO UDRP cases have established that, by virtue of paragraph 4(c) of the Policy, once a Complainant establishes a prima facie case that none of the three circumstances establishing legitimate interests or rights applies, the burden of production on this factor shifts to the Respondent.” See also section 2.1 of the WIPO Overview, 2.0 and Croatia Airlines d d v. Modern Empire Internet Ltd, Company Incorporations and Registered Office services. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was July 1, 2014. On June 2, 2014, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. WIPO Case No. In particular, Complainant operates the Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi resort on Yas Island in Abu Dhabi. Enjoy the privacy and beauty of 100 acres of pristine rainforest on the Caribbean Sea. Forfeiture Complaint in USA v. Certain rights to and interests in the Viceroy Hotel Group at the U. S. District Court for the Central District of California. Viceroy L'Ermitage Beverly Hills stands among the finest of Beverly Hills California luxury hotels, a stately property embodying the spirit of a sophisticated private club and a gracious urban residence. In response to a notification by the Center that the Complaint was administratively deficient, Complainant filed an amendment to the Complaint on June 6, 2014. D2000-1133 (even without a pattern of "preclusive registrations," registrant's deliberate registration of the domain names corresponding to the mark at issue constituted evidence of bad faith). The Company offers dining, accommodation, special events, and personal services. The disputed domain name is therefore identical and confusingly similar to Complainant’s VICEROY trademark and Viceroy Hotel Group’s well-known property’s name; See, PG&E Corp. v. Samuel Anderson and PGE in the year 2000, WIPOCase No. See, United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. Mr. John Zuccarini, Our business isn’t about getting more people to smoke, or encouraging those that do smoke to smoke more. Low-density sustainable development using solar and geothermal energy, • 5-star Viceroy hotel with concierge service. The Panel finds that Complainant has proven on a balance of probabilities that Respondent used the disputed domain name in bad faith within the meaning of paragraphs 4(b)(ii) and 4(b)(iv) of the Policy and that Complainant satisfies the requirements under paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy. See, World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc. v. Aaron Rift, See, Savino Del Bene Inc. v. Graziano Innocenti Gennari, Respondent has on or after November 23, 2013 registered or acquired the disputed domain name comprised of Complainant’s well-known VICEROY trademark and the words “Yas” and “Abu Dhabi” which describe the geographical location of Complainant’s hotel in the United Arab Emirates. See, Drexel University v. David Brouda, Mufg Fund Services (Cayman) Limited is located in GEORGE TOWN, GRAND CAYMAN, Cayman Islands and is part of the Investment Firms Industry. Free returns. Respondent is Next Reservation Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand / Privacy Protection Service, Inc. d/b/a PrivacyProtect.org, Nobby Beach, Queensland Australia. Complainant asserts that Respondent by creating and using webpages in association with the disputed domain name which have the look and feel of Complainant’s home page and are falsely stated to be Complainant’s home page and lead Internet users to third party websites is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers. Sugar Beach, A Viceroy Resort. WIPO Case No. Based on the evidence before the Panel, the Panel finds that Complainant has proven on a balance of probabilities that Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The fact that Respondent did not submit a formal Response does not automatically result in a decision in favor of Complainant. Complainant relies on its submission in Section A. 2. Complainant is Viceroy Cayman Ltd. of Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, Overseas territory of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, represented by Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP, United States of America. The Panel relies on the findings in Section 6 C.1. The content of the website includes pictures of Yas Island, Complainant’s Viceroy hotel with its outstanding architecture as well as a description of all the services available at Complainant’s Viceroy Yas Island Abu Dhabi hotel. See, Gallup, Inc. v. Amish Country Store, NAF Claim No.96209 (registrant has no rights in a domain name when registrant is not known by the mark). Cayman Islands Responsibilities include Company Management and provision of corporate related services. Complainant filed an amended Complaint on June 6, 2014. The Residences at Viceroy Ombria Resort Algarve are not owned, developed, sold or marketed by Viceroy Cayman, Ltd., Viceroy International Holdings Ltd. or any of their respective affiliates. Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, Complainant must prove that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. C $7.10. The Domain Names and Registrar From 1996 till the 2006 gradually the company had a major renovation and expansion with an aggregate of 297 rooms, a mega convention centre, conference and banquet halls. There is no evidence that Respondent has ever been known by or used the trademark VICEROY in association with its own goods or services. Pre-Owned. In order to register with the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority as a new director, you must first provide the following information: Once this information is received and it is confirmed that you do not already exist on our systems, CIMA will email you your logon credentials so … Viceroy Hotel Group LLC operates as a hotel. Complainant has obtained over 100 trademark registrations for the VICEROY trademark in jurisdictions around the world including without limitation the United States, Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Mexico, New Zealand, Oman, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey, the Russian Federation, the European Community, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“Great Britain”). Misland is the investment fund of the Green family of Bermuda. On January 29, 2014 Complainant’s counsel forwarded a copy of the cease and desist letter of December 24, 2013 to Expedia, Inc. who had apparently acquired the disputed domain name. See, Drexel University v. David Brouda, Screen shots of Respondent’s website dated December 17, 2013 include the top line “Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi Home”. D2000-0429 finding that the top level of the domain name such as “.net” or “.com” does not affect the domain name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical or confusingly similar). 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.”. In view of the above findings, the Panel concludes that Respondent registered or acquired the disputed domain name in bad faith. D2001-0067 ("rights or legitimate interest cannot be created where the user of the domain names at issue would not choose such a name unless he was seeking to create an impression of association with the complainant"). However, Respondent did not file a Response nor avail itself of the benefits of paragraph 4(c) of the Policy. Respondent appropriated Complainant’s entire trademark, VICEROY, as the dominant element of the disputed domain name. D2000-0044. We will get in touch with you shortly. See, TPI Holdings Inc. v .JB Designs, Here, there is clear evidence of slavish copying on the website associated with the disputed domain name , as nearly the entire content was scraped verbatim from Complainant’s website for its Yas Abu Dhabi hotel on Complainant’s Viceroy Hotel Group website. The Center sent an email communication to Complainant on June 6, 2014 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. 0 bids. Using fashion and tradition for creative inspiration, Viceroy watches and jewelry designs reflect the most up-to-date and charming trends . Opposer is a Cayman Islands exempt company existing under the laws of the Cayman Islands with registered address at Maples Corporate Services Limited UglandHouse, GrandCayman,KY1-1104, CaymanIslands. WIPO Case No. Complainant further submits that Respondent has also used the disputed domain name in bad faith by registering and maintaining a registration that is identical to Complainant’s VICEROY trademark and the name of the well-known Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi property, Respondent has prevented Viceroy Hotel Group from registering the VICEROY mark specifying its Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi resort as a “.com” domain name. Unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a website may also be relevant to a respondent’s intent. Hachette Filipacchi Presse v. Vanilla Limited/Vanilla Inc/Domain Finance Ltd., WIN, Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that the disputed domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (i) the disputed domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and, (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and. WIPO Case No. Accordingly, Respondent cannot establish a bona fide interest in the disputed domain name. Complainant further promotes its VICEROY trademark and services through numerous websites maintained by Complainant, including its website maintained at the domain name . The Panel finds that Complainant has made a prima facie case that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name . C $3.10. Viceroy Hotels Limited took up 150 Room 3 Star Hotel Project and commenced its commercial operations in 1993. Respondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions. Appropriating another’s entire mark and adding geographic matter to it (i.e. Complainant has not permitted Respondent to register or use any domain name incorporating its VICEROY trademark. Viceroy Houses is a leader in the design, engineering and manufacturing of panelized custom homes for homeowners, builders and developers alike. Many of these supply partners tend to either focus exclusively on their domestic markets or have limited presence globally. It is well-established that the mere registration of a domain name does not confer trademark rights upon the registrant and that such rights can arise only through the bona fide offering of goods or services. D2005-0587). It is well established by prior UDRP panels that where a domain name has been created by a respondent by adding a descriptive or generic word to a distinctive mark in which the complainant has rights, then such a domain is to be considered confusingly similar to complainant's mark for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy (see section 1.9 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Second Edition (WIPO Overview 2.0); e.g. Viceroy evolves from season to season, as colors and fashion trends change. The inclusion of the gTLD “.com” in the disputed domain name does not affect a finding of confusing similarity. Use of advertisements or links to steer consumers away from the rightful owner of the mark incorporated within the domain name in question is not fair or legitimate use: United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. Mr. John Zuccarini, In 2007, Russia’s Growth Technologies Ltd., a subsidiary of Open Investments (OPIN) came calling, looking to buy Viceroy and take it private — … Respondent has no legal relationship with Complainant through which Respondent can claim any rights to the disputed domain name, nor has Complainant consented to Respondent's registration of the disputed domain name. Complainant has widely used, advertised and registered the trademark VICEROY for many years in dozens of international jurisdictions in connection with, among other services, the provision of hotel and resort services including restaurant and bar services, the provision of general purpose facilities for meetings, conferences and exhibitions, and reservation services for hotel accommodations. Complainant through cease and desist letters to Respondent and its predecessors has objected to the registration and use of the disputed domain name, to which Respondent and its predecessors failed to adequately respond. For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant. Complainant is a corporation organized under the laws of the Cayman Islands with a registered office in the Cayman Islands. Respondent (or its client) had been using the disputed domain name to host a website captioned “Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi” that is a knock-off of Complainant's website for its “Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi” property. Credit Ratings, Research and Analysis for the global capital markets. There are 10 companies in the Maples Corporate Services Limited corporate family. See, Savino Del Bene Inc. v. Graziano Innocenti Gennari, Top Rated Seller Top Rated Seller. The WhoIs for the disputed domain name was updated on June 3, 2014 to show the registrant as Next Reservation Ltd. Complainant filed an amended Complaint with the Center on June 6, 2014, naming the Registrant shown in the WhoIs of June 3, 2014. On June 2, 2014 the Center forwarded a “Request for Registrar Verification” to the Registrar Public Domain Registry.com requesting among other matters the name of the Registrant. Complainant has obtained over 100 trademark registrations for the VICEROY trademark in jurisdictions around the world including without limitation the United States, Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Mexico, New Zealand, Oman, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey, the Russian Federation, the European Community, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom. Ltd.; and (iii) TEG Services Holding Inc. (“Electrum Services”) (collectively “Electrum”), owned, held or acquired, directly or indirectly, by JW Aurum (Cayman) Gp Ltd. (“JW Aurum”), including any right to collect and receive any profits and proceeds therefrom, and any interest derived from the proceeds invested in the Electrum A link immediately below states: “Book Now”. D2001-0067 (“rights or legitimate interest cannot be created where the user of the domain names at issue would not choose such a name unless he was seeking to create an impression of association with the complainant”). Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on July 4, 2014. Maples Corporate Services Limited is located in GEORGE TOWN, GRAND CAYMAN, Cayman Islands and is part of the Legal Services Industry. A free inside look at company reviews and salaries posted anonymously by employees. A Cayman Islands Exempted Company receive the following benefits: 100% foreign ownership, no taxes, privacy, limited liability, one shareholder/director for greater control, no audits, no required meetings, and English is their official language. Complainant is Viceroy Cayman Ltd., George Town, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland represented by Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg, United States of America.