Panelist declines RDNH since…well, I don’t know

Moonchul Chang doesn’t give a reason for not finding reverse domain name hijacking in a dead-on-arrival case.

A World Intellectual Property Panelist has decided a UDRP decision for the domain name MIAX.com in favor of the domain name owner. But for an inexplicable reason, he declined to find reverse domain name hijacking.

The circumstances have all of the trappings of reverse domain name hijacking:

• Domain owner registered it in 2000
• Complainant wasn’t formed until 2007 and the trademark it relies on was registered in 2015 with first use claim of 2012
• Complainant sent a number of communications to the domain owner, which the owner describes as “offers” and then a cease & desist
• Firm files UDRP

Based on the information in the published decision, it’s a classic case of RDNH. The domain owner asked for RDNH, but panelist Moonchul Chang declined to find it without really giving a reason. Instead, he merely wrote:

The Panel cannot conclude that the Complainant filed its Complaint in bad faith for the purposes of RDNH, and mere lack of success of the Complaint is not in itself sufficient for a finding of RDNH.

The Panel is of the opinion that the Complainant has not filed its Complaint in bad faith as an attempt at RDNH.

That’s like a panelist ruling that a domain was registered in bad faith by writing “The panel concludes the domain was registered in bad faith” without giving any reason.

Instead, as stated by the information in the decision, this case was dead on arrival due to the chronology.

The Complainant, Miami International Holdings, Inc, was also represented by counsel. It uses the domain name MIAXoptions.com.