IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Alexandria Division

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

Plaintiff,

v. 1:26-cv-03167-MSN-IDD

VIRGINIAWIC.COM,

Defendant.

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (the “Motion”). ECF 3. Having considered Plaintiff’s Complaint, the Motion, and the supporting papers, the Court will GRANT Plaintiff’s Motion.

Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges a cybersquatting claim in violation of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), against in rem Defendant virginiawic.com. See ECF 1 ¶¶ 41-49. Plaintiff is an agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia and administers the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (“WIC”) in Virginia. ECF 1 ¶ 5. Since at least 2016, Plaintiff has continuously used the name and mark VIRGINIA WIC to identify its WIC program. Id. ¶ 20. On or about February 1, 2018, Plaintiff registered the domain name virginiawic.com through GoDaddy.com, LLC, and used it continuously until early 2026 to direct internet users to its official WIC website. Id. ¶¶ 19-20. On February 1, 2026, Plaintiff’s registration was due to expire. Id. ¶ 24. Due to an administrative oversight, Plaintiff did not renew the registration. Id. By mid-February 2026, the domain name no longer directed visitors to Plaintiff’s WIC website. Id. Plaintiff’s registration was subsequently deleted from the .com registry. Id. On June 2, 2026, an unknown third party, concealing its identity behind a commercial privacy service, registered virginiawic.com for itself. Id. ¶ 3. That registrant now uses the domain name to redirect internet users to sexually explicit, commercial adult websites. Id. Plaintiff alleges that the third-party registrant is being compensated for the internet traffic it diverts. Id.

To obtain a TRO, Plaintiff must show (1) a likelihood of success on the merits of its cybersquatting claim; (2) that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a TRO; (3) that the balance of equities tips in its favor; and (4) that a TRO is in the public interest. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008).

Likelihood of Success on the Merits. Plaintiff has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. As a threshold matter, this Court likely has jurisdiction over the action and the relevant parties. To proceed in rem, Plaintiff must not be able to obtain in personam jurisdiction over a person who would have been a defendant in a civil action, or through due diligence was not able

to find such a person, by (a) sending notice of the alleged violation and intent to proceed to the registrant of the domain name at the postal and e-mail address provided to the registrar, and (b) publishing notice of the action as the court may direct promptly after filing the action. See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)(2). Plaintiff has sent such a notice to the postal and e-mail addresses of record with the registrar. ECF 1 ¶ 14. Accordingly, the Court has in rem jurisdiction over the in rem Defendant. Venue is proper in this Court because VeriSign, Inc., the operator of the .com registry, is in the Eastern District of Virginia. Id. ¶ 11; 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)(2)(A).

To prevail on its cybersquatting claim, Plaintiff must show that (1) it has a protectable trademark, (2) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its trademark, and (3) the defendant had a bad faith intent to profit from Plaintiff’s mark. See Hawes v. Network Sols., Inc., 337 F.3d 377, 383 (4th Cir. 2003). Although Plaintiff does not allege that “Virginia WIC” is a registered trademark, see, e.g., ECF 1 ¶¶ 2, 19, “unregistered or common law marks are entitled to protection under the ACPA.” Klumba.UA, LLC v. Klumba.com, 320 F. Supp. 3d 772, 777 (E.D. Va. 2018) (citing Lamparello v. Falwell, 420 F.3d 309, 311 (4th Cir. 2005)). “[C]ommon law trademark rights are acquired through actual use of the mark in a given market in the United States.” Id. Plaintiff alleges that it has used the name and mark VIRGINIA WIC “to identify its WIC program and the services it provides” since “at least 2016.” As such, Plaintiff likely has a protectable common law trademark. The domain name is confusingly similar to Plaintiff’s trademark: it contains the exact mark followed only by .com. And because Plaintiff alleges the registrant is using the domain name to redirect internet users to sexually explicit, commercial adult websites for which it is compensated, see ECF 1 ¶ 3, it is likely that the defendant is using the mark in bad faith to profit. Accordingly, Plaintiff has established a likelihood of success on the

merits.

Irreparable Harm. Plaintiff has sufficiently demonstrated that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm if a TRO is not granted. Absent a TRO, Plaintiff cannot stop the third-party registrant from diverting users seeking its WIC program to sexually explicit content. And because Plaintiff has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, Plaintiff is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm. 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a).

Balance of the Equities and Public Interest. Plaintiff has also sufficiently shown that the balance of the equities favors a TRO, and that such a TRO is in the public’s interest. Absent relief, the public, including pregnant women, new mothers, caregivers of infants and young children, WIC vendors, and health care providers, will continue to be exposed to sexually explicit content

and hindered in their efforts to obtain information about public safety programs.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED. It is further

ORDERED that Verisign, Inc. shall place the domain name virginiawic.com on registry hold or lock status, to prevent its transfer, modification, or deletion, and to disable or redirect its

resolution so that it no longer resolves to the third-party registrant’s website, for a period of fourteen days from the entry of this Order.

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall post a bond or surety in the amount of $500 within two business days, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c). It is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall cause a copy of this Order to be published in the Washington Post or the Washington Times within 14 days of this Order. It is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff shall provide a copy of this Order to VeriSign, Inc. and Spaceship, Inc. It is further

ORDERED that a hearing on this matter is SCHEDULED for October 9, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. to address whether it is appropriate to convert this TRO to a preliminary injunction. It is further

ORDERED that the October 16, 2026, hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion is vacated.

The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Order to counsel of record.

/s/ Michael S. Nachmanoff

United States District Judge

September 29, 2026

Alexandria, Virginia

Run Dates: October 7, 14, 21, 28, 2026 AD#105710