Case number | CAC-UDRP-105720 |
---|---|
Time of filing | 2023-08-22 09:48:10 |
Domain names | arcelormittalsourcing.com |
Case administrator
Name | Olga Dvořáková (Case admin) |
---|
Complainant
Organization | ARCELORMITTAL |
---|
Complainant representative
Organization | NAMESHIELD S.A.S. |
---|
Respondent
Name | roseM MARY |
---|
The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.
International trademark n° 947686 ARCELORMITTAL, registered on August 3, 2007.
The Complainant is the largest steel producing company in the world and is the market leader in steel for use in automotive, construction, household appliances and packaging with 69.1 million tons crude steel made in 2021. It is the owner of the international trademark n° 947686 ARCELORMITTAL, registered on August 3, 2007.
The disputed domain name <arcelormittalsourcing.com> was registered on August 15, 2023. It resolves to a parking page. MX servers are configured.
NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).
The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).
The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.
Legal Grounds |
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable." Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that the Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and (2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. In view of the Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of the Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences as it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3. As to the first element, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name <arcelormittalsourcing.com> is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s very well-known trademark ARCELORMITTAL, since it incorporates the mark in its entirety. The addition of the generic term “sourcing” is not sufficient to distinguish the disputed domain name from the mark. The inconsequential gTLD “.com” may be ignored. (i) before any notice to the Respondent of the dispute, the use by the Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or (ii) the Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if the Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or (iii) the Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not known by the disputed domain name; has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name and is not related in any way to the Complainant; the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent; and neither license nor authorization has been granted by the Complainant to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark ARCELORMITTAL nor to apply for registration of the disputed domain name. The disputed domain name was registered on August 15, 2023, many years after the Complainant has shown that its ARCELORMITTAL mark had become very well-known. It resolves to a parking page. MX servers are configured. The Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. As to the third element, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademark and reputation, the Panel infers that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark. See WIPO Case No. DCO2018-0005, ArcelorMittal SA v. Tina Campbell (“The Panel finds that the trademark ARCELORMITTAL is so well-known internationally for metals and steel production that it is inconceivable that the Respondent might have registered a domain name similar to or incorporating the mark without knowing of it.”). |
- arcelormittalsourcing.com: Transferred
PANELLISTS
Name | Alan Limbury |
---|