RDNH Case D2019-0755

The WIPO domain name dispute case D2019-0755 involved the Complainant, Pet Plan Ltd, a UK-based company providing pet insurance services, and the Respondent, AD Burns from the USA. The disputed domain name was , registered by the Respondent. The Complainant argued that the domain name was confusingly similar to its PETPLAN trademark and that the Respondent had no legitimate interests in it, accusing them of bad faith registration and use.

The Respondent countered by requesting denial of the Complaint and accusing the Complainant of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH), arguing their legitimate use of the domain for services related to pet drug prescription plans.

The Panel concluded that the Complainant failed to demonstrate the Respondent’s lack of legitimate interest in the domain name or bad faith registration and use. Moreover, the Panel did not find sufficient indication of RDNH by the Complainant. Ultimately, the complaint was denied, with the Panel ruling against a finding of RDNH.

For more details, you can view the full decision at WIPO – Case D2019-0755.

The WIPO domain name dispute case D2019-0755 involved the Complainant, Pet Plan Ltd, a UK-based company providing pet insurance services, and the Respondent, AD Burns from the USA. The disputed domain name was , registered by the Respondent. The Complainant argued that the domain name was confusingly similar to its PETPLAN trademark and that the…