VirtualPoint Inc. vs SoBold Limited " Fresh UDRP seems typical of a “Plan B” setup." "Wow! Remind me to never hire Carstens & Cahoon, LLP as my IP attorneys!" "... represented by Carstens & Cahoon, LLP, United States." "The Panel therefore finds Complainant guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking." "... represented by Carstens & Cahoon, LLP, United States." "For all the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is denied." "daring and confident" Auction Bidding History
BRETT E. LEWIS (BL6812) Email: LEWIS & LIN, LLC MICHAEL D. CILENTO Email: LEWIS & LIN, LLC 77 Sands Street, 6th Floor, Brooklyn, NY 11201 Telephone: (718) 243-9323 Facsimile: (718) 243-9326
Plaintiff VirtualPoint Inc. (DBA SyncPoint)
Defendant SoBold Limited
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA VIRTUALPOINT INC. vs. SOBOLD LIMITED Plaintiff VirtualPoint Inc. ("VirtualPoint" or "Plaintiff"), by and through its undersigned attorneys, for its Complaint against Defendant, SoBold Limited ("SoBold" or "Defendant"), alleges as follows: NATURE OF ACTION 1. Plaintiff VirtualPoint brings this complaint against Defendant SoBold Limited for a Declaration from this Court that: (i) Plaintiff has not violated the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) or (c), or the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), 15 U.S.C § 1125(d) and is the rightful registered name holder or registrant of the (SOBOLD.COM) domain name registration (the "Domain Name"). JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 2. Plaintiff further seeks monetary and/or statutory damages and attorneys’ fees for reverse domain name hijacking under 15 U.S.C. § 1114(2)(d)(iv). THE PARTIES 3. Plaintiff VirtualPoint is a California corporation with a principal address of 1340 Reynolds Ave. # 116-290, Irvine, CA, 92614-5525. 4. Upon information and belief, Defendant SoBold Limited is a British corporation with a principal place of business at 215 - 221 Borough High Street, London, SE1 1JA United Kingdom. BACKGROUND 5. Plaintiff VirtualPoint is a web development firm based in Southern California that specializes in the purchase of prominent site names and the development of websites such as,,,, and 6. Prior to acquiring the Domain Name in October 2021, Plaintiff had never heard of the UK based Defendant which should come as no surprise since Complainant is in the US. 7. Upon information and belief, according to records on, Defendant has been conducting business under the domain names (SOBOLD.CO.UK) and (SOBOLDLTD.COM) since 2014. 8a. In October 2021, Ms. Harriet Riddick made an initial offer of 400 USD for the Domain Name for purchase. She further asserted: "Hi - no worries. I have just moved to a house with the name SoBold and I thought it would be a fun idea to have the domain to use for my home improvements project." That dialogue did not result in a sale as the parties were not in agreement as to the appropriate amount for the Domain Name. At no time did she identify herself as associated with the company. 8b. In November 2021, Mr. Louie Heaton made a 1,000 USD offer for the Domain Name for purchase with the same result – the parties could not agree to the appropriate amount for the Domain Name. He did not initially indicate he was affiliated with the company. VirtualPoint never even made a counteroffer. CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF 9. A notable number of third parties offer services under variants of the phrase, “So Bold”. 10. A person may register a generic or descriptive phrase that is non-exclusive and used non-competitively as a domain name on a first come, first served basis, as a general rule. 11. Defendant owns no exclusive rights to the term, “So Bold” in the United States. 12. VirtualPoint, through its owner Mr. Lahoti, registered the Domain Name in good faith without any knowledge of Defendant and Defendant’s trademark is not registered in the United States. 13. A justiciable controversy exists between VirtualPoint and Defendants. 14. To resolve this actual controversy, VirtualPoint seeks a declaration and judgment that its registration and use of the Domain Name is legitimate. REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING 15. SoBold initiated a UDRP proceeding against VirtualPoint in a bad faith attempt to deprive VirtualPoint of the Domain Name, when SoBold had no exclusive right to the name “So Bold” in the United States. 16. SoBold’s conduct was knowing, intentional, and improper and caused VirtualPoint to suffer damages that will be established at trial. 17. VirtualPoint has incurred costs, including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees and other damages, in seeking to prevent the transfer of the Domain Name.