Update: changes affecting how to recover a lapsed .us domain that was…

Update: changes affecting how to recover a lapsed .us domain that was. UDRP and ccTLD domain recovery and defense across .us. Email the firm to assess your cas…

A brand owner lets a .us registration lapse. Someone else picks it up within days. Now the original registrant wants it back – and the question is whether the usDRP, a court action, or a quiet transaction is the right path.

Recovering a lapsed .us domain that has been re-registered turns on a distinct procedure: the usDRP, the dispute policy governing the .us ccTLD administered by Neustar (now GoDaddy Registry). Unlike the UDRP's cumulative "registered and used in bad faith" test, the usDRP applies its own bad-faith analysis under the .us nexus rules. The governing national procedure applies, and any claimant must satisfy both US nexus eligibility and the usDRP's three-element test. This alert covers what has changed, who is affected, and the practical next step.

What changed for .us recovery filings?

The .us zone operates under the usDRP – a procedure with its own rules, separate from the ICANN UDRP. Recent operational updates to the .us registry infrastructure and its affiliated dispute provider have affected how complaints are accepted, how nexus eligibility is verified, and how chain-of-title history is reviewed at the point of filing. Brand owners who previously relied on informal registrar escalations for lapsed-and-re-registered .us names now face a more formally structured path. The usDRP requires a claimant to demonstrate trademark or service mark rights, confusing similarity, the registrant's lack of legitimate interest, and registration or use in bad faith – and, critically, the claimant must independently satisfy US nexus requirements to hold a .us registration if transfer is the intended remedy.

One practical consequence: a complainant who wins a usDRP transfer order but lacks a qualifying US nexus cannot actually receive the transferred domain. That mismatch – winning the proceeding but being ineligible to hold the result – is a trap we see regularly in our practice. It must be resolved before filing, not after.

Who is affected by these changes?

Three groups feel the impact directly. First, US-based brand owners whose .us registrations lapsed due to a missed renewal and were immediately re-registered by a third party. Second, foreign entities with a US nexus (a US citizen officer, a US-incorporated subsidiary, or a US presence) who hold .us names and need to understand whether that nexus survives a corporate restructure. Third, domain investors considering acquisition of a .us name with a prior dispute or lapse event in its history – because acquiring a tainted domain can transfer the legal exposure as well as the name.

Chain-of-title checks are now more consequential than they were. A prior usDRP proceeding against a .us name, even one that ended without a transfer, can affect a buyer's ability to assert clean title. We conduct pre-acquisition due diligence on .us names specifically for this risk: reviewing prior dispute history, the registration timeline around any lapse event, and the RDDS/WHOIS record for nexus markers. For transaction structure, domain transactions and due diligence at COGNOMEN addresses the escrow and assignment mechanics relevant to .us acquisitions.

What to do now if your .us name was taken after a lapse

The realistic next step is a threshold assessment – not a complaint. Before filing a usDRP complaint, confirm that: (1) you hold a registered US trademark or service mark (or a common-law right with US evidence); (2) you satisfy .us nexus eligibility; and (3) the new registrant's conduct shows bad faith under the usDRP factors rather than a legitimate re-registration of an available name. That third point is where lapsed-domain cases become genuinely contested. A domain that lapsed, expired, and was registered through a drop-catch service by a party with no knowledge of the prior owner's mark can present a difficult bad-faith case, even when the name is identical to a brand.

Where the usDRP is not a clean path – for example, where you lack nexus eligibility or where the bad-faith evidence is thin – a direct purchase approach with structured escrow is sometimes the faster resolution. For assignments and transfer structuring, see our guide to domain assignment agreements. And where the conduct is clearly abusive and damages are in play, US anticybersquatting litigation remains an option; the contrast with court-route cybersquatting actions in other jurisdictions is addressed in our analysis of court action for cybersquatting.

For an assessment of your .us domain dispute or a pre-acquisition due diligence review, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.