WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Educational Testing Service v. Perfect Privacy, LLC / ielts certificate Case No. D2019-0362 1. The Parties

Complainant is Educational Testing Service of Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America (the “United States”), represented by Jones Day, United States.

Respondent is Perfect Privacy, LLC of Jacksonville, Florida, United States / ielts certificate of London, California, United States. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

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

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on February 16, 2019. On February 18, 2019, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On February 18, 2019, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the Domain Name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to Complainant on February 19, 2019 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 February 22, 2019.

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the 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 February 26, 2019. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was March 18, 2019. Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified Respondent’s default on March 19, 2019.

The Center appointed Ingrida Karina-Berzina as the sole panelist in this matter on March 25, 2019. 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 is a private non-profit educational testing and assessment service that administers more than 50 million tests per year in 180 countries worldwide. Complainant’s TOEFL test has been used since 1964 to evaluate the English proficiency of persons whose native language is not English. The TOEFL test and an online version called the TOEFL iBT have been taken by over 30 million students for submission to academic institutions, employers and others. Each year, the test is administered in 165 countries at more than 4,500 testing centers.

Complainant is the proprietor of numerous trademark registrations containing the TOEFL mark (the “Mark”) in a number of countries, including the following:

United States trademark No. 1103427 for TOEFL (word mark) in classes 16 and 41, registered on October 3, 1978,
United States trademark No. 2461224 for TOEFL (word mark) in class 9, registered on June 19, 2001,
United States trademark No. 3168050 for TOEFL (word mark) in classes 16, 41 and 42, registered on November 7, 2006,
Indian trademark No. 377189 for TOEFL (word mark) in class 16, registered on June 17, 1981.

Complainant is also the registrant of numerous domains that incorporate the Mark, including , registered on October 24, 1994.

Respondent registered the Domain Name on October 12, 2018. Following a request by Complainant to the hosting provider W, the Domain Name does not currently resolve to an active website. Previously, the Domain Name resolved to a website purporting to offer TOEFL certificates for purchase and Respondent appeared to be operating in India. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

Complainant contends that each of the three elements specified in paragraph 4(a) of the UDRP are satisfied in this dispute.

In relation to the first element, Complainant contends that it is the proprietor of the TOEFL trademark, and that the Domain Name is identical and confusingly similar to this trademark. The Domain Name contains the Mark in its entirety and differs from the Mark only by the addition of the generic terms “certificate” and “sale”, and such terms increase the likelihood of confusion because they are related to Complainant’s services.

In relation to the second element, Complainant contends that it has supplied prima facie evidence that Respondent lacks rights or