First problem Bangz doesn’t own a trademark on the term.
Second problem Bangz didn’t provide the panel any evidence of a common law trademark.
Third problem Bangz didn’t present any evidence to the Panel any evidence.
They seemed to just file the complaint
Matter of fact the complainant told the panel:
“Complainant does not possess the trademark rights to “Bangz” because there are multiple “Bangz” salons located in the Washington, DC area. However, Complainant, Bangz, Inc. has done business in New Jersey since 1994 under the “Bangz” name and has continuously used this name since this time.”
So for the Panel it was any easy case and win for the domain holder even through they didn’t bother to file a response
Here is what the panel had to say and in case your wondering the Complainant did have an attorney, John J. Zidziunas of New Jersey.
“In this case Panel has nothing of substance on which to base a finding of common law trademark rights.
“There is no evidence provided to support the claims made in the Complaint.
“Without evidence Panel must treat those claims as bald assertions to which little or no weight can attach”
“There is no proof of establishment of Complainant’s business in 1994 under the name “Bangz”, or otherwise.
“There is no evidence of the accolades it is said to have received.
“There is no other proof of the alleged reputation said to exist in the “Bangz” name.
“There are no examples of advertising or promotion, no turnover, no third party evidence of the repute of the business.
“Nothing in fact to prove reputation
“On the contrary, the name is to a degree non-distinctive of hair salon services and there are Complainant’s admissions that third parties are indeed using the same name and that Complainant has no trademark rights.”