Law firm goes 0 for 6 filing UDRP disputes: Ouch

This law firm appears to have lost every UDRP case it has filed on behalf of Complainants. Its latest resulted in a reverse domain name hijacking decision.

When is it time for a law firm to brush up on UDRP rules? How regarding when it goes to 0 for 6 as a Complainant’s representative?

That’s Gearhart Law’s record following losing a case for demoji.com.

The domain name owner registered demoji.com years ahead of the Complainant claimed rights to a trademark for demoji, making this case dead on arrival. The Complainant argued the domain ownership might have changed more recently since Whois showed an “updated date,” but when attorney John Berryhill provided evidence of the earlier registration, the Complainant stuck to its guns. So, this case was dead on arrival since the Complainant could not show that the domain was registered in bad faith to target it.

Thus, panelist Luca Barbero found in the domain owner’s favor and found reverse domain name hijacking.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise to Gearhart Law.

Following all, this is the fourth of six cases it has filed that had the same fact pattern, and it hasn’t won any of the six cases it filed.

Perhaps Gearhart Law ought to stick to defending cases. Based on my search, it’s a perfect 1 for 1 in those cases.