Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
National Arbitration Forum- Alex Sima Sandler

National Arbitration Forum- Alex Sima Sandler

Ratings: (0)|Views: 220 |Likes:
Published by FightFraud
Scam and con artists = Alex and Sima Sandler lose to court decision
Scam and con artists = Alex and Sima Sandler lose to court decision

More info:

Published by: FightFraud on Nov 13, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





 Carey International, Inc. d/b/a Manhattan International LimousineNetwork Ltd v. Alex Kogan (successor Sima Sandler)Claim Number: FA0505000486191
 Complainant is
Carey International, Inc.
("Complainant"),represented by
Sara L. Edelman
, of 
Davis & Gilbert LLP
, 1740Broadway, New York, NY 10019. Respondent is
Sima Sandler
("Respondent"), represented by
David J. James
, 1325 Fourth Avenue,Suite 600, Seattle, WA 98101.
 The domain names at issue are
, and
, registered with
  The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently andimpartially and to the best of his or her knowledge has no knownconflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Calvin A. Hamilton as Panelist. 
 Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forumelectronically on May 27, 2005; the National Arbitration Forum receiveda hard copy of the Complaint on May 31, 2005. On June 1, 2005, Domaindiscover confirmed by e-mail to the NationalArbitration Forum that the domain names
, and
are registered withDomaindiscover and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Domaindiscover has verified that Respondent is bound bythe Domaindiscover registration agreement and has thereby agreed toresolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordancewith ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the"Policy").
 On June 3, 2005, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), settinga deadline of June 23, 2004 by which Respondent could file a Responseto the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post andfax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration astechnical, administrative and billing contacts, and topostmaster@careyglobal.com, postmaster@careyus.com, andpostmaster@manhattanlimo.com by e-mail. A timely electronic copy of the Response was received on July 5, 2005.However, since the hardcopy form of the Response was not receiveduntil after the deadline for response, the National Arbitration Forumconsiders the Response to be deficient and not in compliance withICANN Rule #5(a). A timely Additional Submission was received from Complainant on July11, 2005.No reply to Complainant's Additional Submission was submitted byRespondent. On July 12, 2005, pursuant to Complainant's request to have thedispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National ArbitrationForum appointed Calvin A. Hamilton as Panelist. On July 20, 2005, the Panel ordered that the time period for issuing itsDecision be extended until July 29, 2005. 
Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred fromRespondent to Complainant.Respondent requests a finding that Complainant has engaged inreverse domain name hijacking and that the remedy requested byComplainant be denied. 
A. Complainant In relation to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i), Complainant, Carey International, Inc.,contends that Respondent's
are both identical and confusingly similar toComplainant's CAREY trademark and that Respondent's
is also identical and confusingly similar to
both Complainant's MANHATTAN LIMOUSINE common law trademarkand its MANHATTAN INTERNATIONAL registered trademark. In relation to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), Complainant contends that Respondenthas no rights or legitimate interests in respect of 
as Respondent's domain names are not in connection with a
bona fide
offering of goods or services, nor is Respondent commonly known bythis name, nor is Respondent making a legitimate noncommercial orfair use of the domain name. Complainant contends that Respondentis plainly using all three domain names for the sole purpose of deceiving the public in order to gain a commercial advantage. In relation to Policy 4(a)(iii), Complainant contends that Respondentregistered and is using domain names in bad faith by luring customerswho are looking for CAREY and MANHATTAN brand transportationservices and then misdirecting those customers into purchasing its owncompeting services. B. Respondent Sima Sandler, against whom the Complaint was initiated, filed noResponse.However, Alex Kogan filed a Response as successor to Sima Sandlerwhich was received by the Forum as indicated above. That Response makes the following assertions: Respondent contends that Complainant fails to prove all threeelements of the Policy therefore failing to meet the burden of proof. In relation to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i), Respondent makes no response to thearguments of Complainant in relation to Carey. However, Respondentcontends that the domain name
is notidentical or confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant hasrights. This is due to the fact that Complainant has no registered rightsin the marks MANHATTAN LIMOUSINE, MANHATTANLIMO orMANHATTAN, nor can any common law rights be established due tolack of evidence of secondary meaning of the mark and the fact thatMANHATTAN LIMOUSINE has no web presence. In relation to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), Respondent contends that he has rightsor legitimate interests in the domain names in accordance with Policy ¶5(c) as he has used these domain names in connection with a
offering of services before receiving any notice of this dispute and

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->