In the case of VibrAlign, Inc. v. Armando Martinez / Ludeca, a 3-member Panel denied the complaint where Complainant failed to demonstrate any trademark rights in the expression “thealignmentblog.com”. Because the Complainant failed on this first element of the UDRP, the Panel did not consider the remaining two elements, i.e. rights/legitimate interests or bad faith use and registration.
The Panel found that the two words “alignment” and “blog” together make a description of a service. The only evidence Complainant submitted was a screenshot of a page showing first use of the expression back in 2009. The Panel found the evidence insufficient to show any secondary meaning or trademark rights in the expression owned by Complainant.
VibrAlign, Inc. v. Armando Martinez / Ludeca, FA1510001640543 (Nat’l Arb. Forum November 13, 2015).
About the Author: Chicago technology and intellectual property attorney Evan Brown helps clients with a wide variety of issues, including domain name disputes under the UDRP. Call him at (630) 362-7237, send email to ebrown [at] internetcases.com, or follow him on Twitter @internetcases. Read Evan’s other blog, internetcases, for more information about general internet law.