My man Raymond Hackney who writes posts for thedomains.com, as well as his own blog at tldinvestors.com, pointed out two diametrically opposed URS decisions filed by the same complainant Aeropostale Procurement Company, Inc. of New York, one of which concludes they own the trademark to the clothing line of Aeropostale and the other examiner finding they do not.
In the Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) proceeding on the domain name Aeropostale.Uno, decided on April 10th, 2014, the examiner Alan L. Limbury found that the “copies of the certificates of registration of seven United States AEROPOSTALE trademarks, four of which are in the name R. H. Macy & Co., Inc., two of which are in the name Aeropostale West, Inc., and one of which is in the name Aeropostale, Inc.” was not sufficient to establish that the Complainant, Aeropostale Procurement Company, Inc. owned the trademark.
“The Complainant submitted no evidence of any relationship between any of those companies and the Complainant, Aeropostale Procurement Company, Inc” and denied the URS Complaint.
However that was the second URS filed by Aeropostale Procurement Company, Inc.
Five weeks before, another URS examiner suspended the domain name Aeropostale.Clothing finding that the same Complainant, Aeropostale Procurement Company, Inc., did in fact own the trademark on the term.
“The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word mark:
(i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
(ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
(iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.
Determined: Finding for Complainant