For Love and Lemons, LLC v Xin Xiong - WIPO Case No. D2023-5022

ARBITRATION

AND

MEDIATION CENTER

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

For Love and Lemons, LLC v. Xin Xiong

Case No. D2023-5022

1. The Parties

The Complainant is For Love and Lemons, LLC, United States of America, represented by Sisun Law,

United States of America (“United States” or “USA”, or “US”).

The Respondent is Xin Xiong, China.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name <forlove-lemons.com> is registered with Name.com, Inc. (the “Registrar”).

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on December 1, 2023. On December 4, 2023, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On December 4, 2023, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.

The Center verified that the 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 December 8, 2023. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was December 28, 2023. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on January 12, 2024.

The Center appointed Anne-Virginie La Spada as the sole panelist in this matter on January 17, 2024. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. 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.

page 2

4. Factual Background

The Complainant is a US fashion/clothing company, with headquarters in Los Angeles, USA.

The Complainant owns various trademark registrations for FOR LOVE & LEMONS, among which:

-	United States trademark registration no. 4186612, registered on August 7, 2012 in class 25;
-	United States trademark registration no. 6045982, registered on May 5, 2020 in classes 9, 14, 18, 25 and 35;
-	United States trademark registration no. 6634388, registered on February 1, 2022 in class 25

The Complainant owns the domain name <forloveandlemons.com> registered on April 12, 2009. This domain name resolves to the Complainant’s commercial website proposing clothes and fashion accessories.

The disputed domain name was registered on June 18, 2022.

The disputed domain name resolved to a commercial website with contents conveying the impression that it is an official website of the Complainant, and reproducing the Complainant’s trademark and logo, as well as certain images, in connection with an offer for sale of the clothing articles of the “for love & lemons” brand and of competing brands. In the general terms and conditions accessible on the website, the operator of the website designates itself as “Cheap for Love &…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading For Love and Lemons, LLC v Xin Xiong

Details

AGLC: For Love and Lemons, LLC v Xin Xiong WIPO Case No. D2023-5022
Case: WIPO Case No. D2023-5022
Decision Date: 01-02-2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of For Love and Lemons, LLC v. Xin Xiong, the Complainant, an American fashion and clothing company, filed a complaint against the Respondent, Xin Xiong from China, with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center concerning the disputed domain name <forlove-lemons.com>. The primary legal issues involved whether the domain name was confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, whether the Respondent had rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, and whether the domain name had been registered and used in bad faith. The Complainant argued that the domain name was confusingly similar to its trademark, the Respondent had no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, and the domain name was registered and used in bad faith. The Respondent did not respond to the Complainant's contentions.

The Panel found that the disputed domain name was confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, as the replacement of the ampersand with a hyphen did not sufficiently distinguish the domain name. The Panel also found that the Complainant had established a prima facie case that the Respondent lacked rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. Additionally, the Panel determined that the Respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith, as the website connected to the domain name imitated the Complainant's logo and was likely to mislead internet users into believing it was an official website of the Complainant. Therefore, the Panel ordered the transfer of the disputed domain name to the Complainant in accordance with the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy and the Rules.

This case highlights the importance of protecting trademark rights in the digital space and the potential consequences for those who register and use domain names in bad faith. The decision serves as a reminder to domain name registrants of the need to ensure that their use of domain names does not infringe on the rights of others or create confusion among internet users.

Orders