WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Domain Administrator, See PrivacyG / Site Matrix LLC, Domain Administrator Case No. D2018-2050 1. The Parties

Complainant is Tyson Foods, Inc. of Springdale, Arkansas, United States of America (“United States”) represented by Loeb & Loeb, LLP of Chicago, Illinois, United States.

Respondent is Domain Administrator, See PrivacyG of Phoenix, Arizona, United States / Site Matrix LLC, Domain Administrator of San Juan, Puerto Rico, United States. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with NameSilo, LLC (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on September 12, 2018. On September 12, 2018, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Disputed Domain Name. On September 12, 2018, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the Disputed Domain Name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to Complainant on September 13, 2018, providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. Complainant filed an amended Complaint on September 18, 2018.

The Center verified that the Complaint and amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on September 19, 2018. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was October 9, 2018. Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified Respondent’s default on October 11, 2018.

The Center appointed Douglas M. Isenberg as the sole panelist in this matter on October 16, 2018. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7. 4. Factual Background

Complainant states that it is “one of the largest food production companies in the United States and throughout the world” with “more than $38 Billion in sales in 2017” and “more than 122,000 employees at facilities and offices in the United States and around the world.”

Complainant states, and provides evidence to support, that it owns multiple trademark registrations that consist of or contain the mark TYSON, including the following:

- U.S. Reg. No. 1,748,683 for TYSON for use in connection with “fresh and frozen, cooked and uncooked meat and poultry sold separately and as part of prepackaged prepared meals” (first used in commerce in 1958, registered on January 26, 1993),

- U.S. Reg. No. 2,810,231 for TYSON for use in connection with “beef and pork” (first used in commerce on January 10, 2003, registered on February 3, 2004), and

- U.S. Reg. No. 2,833,874 for TYSON for use in connection with “luncheon meats [, pepperoni ] and sausage” (first used in commerce on January 10, 2003, registered on April 20, 2004).

These trademarks are referred to herein as the “TYSON Trademark.”

Complainant operates websites using the domain names and .

The Disputed Domain Name was created on August 14, 2018. The Disputed Domain Name is being used in connection with what appears to be a monetized parking page, with links labeled “Job Posting Board,” “Recruiting Agency,” and “Staffing Companies.” 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

Complainant contends, in relevant part, as follows:

- The Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the TYSON Trademark because it “incorporates Complainant’s TYSON and TYSON FOODS marks in full, changing the famous and federally registered TYSON mark only by adding the letter ‘s’ to Tyson, the descriptive terms ‘foods’ and ‘career’ and the generic top-level domain (‘gTLD’) ‘.com.’”

- Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name because, inter alia, Respondent acted “[w]ithout Complainant’s authorization or consent”, “Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, has not used or prepared to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services, has not been authorized, licensed, or otherwise permitted by Complainant to register and/or use the concerned domain name”, “the pertinent WHOIS information” does not identify Respondent as “Tyson”, and “Respondent’s use of the domain name constitutes an intent, for commercial gain, to misleadingly divert consumers and potential employees to a website with a gateway for links to other websites (including websites unaffiliated with Complainant).”

- The Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith because, inter alia, “Respondent acquired and is commercially using the domain name, a domain name that is confusingly similar to Complainant’s TYSON and TYSON FOODS marks, to capitalize on Internet users’ efforts to find Complainant’s website and seek information about employment opportunities with Complainant.” B. Respondent

Respondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings

Pursuant to the Policy, Complainant is required to prove the presence of each of the following three elements to obtain the relief it has requested: (i) the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights, (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respe