The Trademark Board has resisted registration of self-laudatory phrases in particular. This is certainly not a simple case where a certificate of registration has been supplied or where common law recognition of a distinctive mark can be easily ascertained. This problem bleeds into the issues of Respondent's rights, legitimate interest and bad faith. As such, it is being used merely to describe Respondent's services as it does for thousands of other travel agencies online. This is the kind of legitimate interest that US law protects when it discourages use of descriptive marks.
Similarity is only in the choice of domain name.
In the material provided by Complainant, the Respondent identifies itself distinctively in very large and impressive typeface including its address and contact information and a solicitation for business. On its face, it appears to be a bona fide offer and Complainant provides no proof to the contrary. Nor is there any evidence of bad faith presented by the Complainant. The Complainant has not met the burden of proof required by the UDRP Policy. The domain name remains with the holder.