{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101870",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-02-02 09:38:29",
    "domain_names": [
        "arcelurmittal.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ArcelorMittal SA"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Laurent Becker)",
    "respondent": [
        "foundationfe"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\n The Complainant is a large steel company based in Luxembourg. He is the market leader in steel for use in automotive, construction, household appliances and packaging with operations in more than 60 countries. He holds sizeable captive supplies of raw materials and operates extensive distribution networks. The Company name is ARCELORMITTAL since several years. Therefore the Complainant registrated the <arcelormittal.com> domain name on 27th of 2006 and arcelormittal trademarks as well (word trademark IR No. 947686 in 2007), both active.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent is a domain holder in the U.S. On January 21, 2018 the Respondent registered the disputed domain name. He linked the disputed domain to a website which is not active. This mislead internet traffic damages the reputation of Complainant.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, represented by the company Nameshield, Ms. Enora Millocheau, France, filed a complaint against the Respondent claiming that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name without rights or legitimate interest and in bad faith. Therefore the registration should be declared abusive and the disputed domain name transferred to the Complainant.\r\n\r\nThe domain name is a case of Typosquatting. This practical is considered as a hallmark of Policy § 4(a) (iii) bad faith. \r\n\r\nSee Computerized Sec. Sys., Inc. v. Hu, FA 157321 (Forum June 23, 2003) (finding that the respondent engaged in typosquatting, which is evidence of bad faith registration and use under Policy § 4(a) (iii)).\r\n\r\nAs prior WIPO UDRP panels have held, the incorporation of a famous trademark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use. Please see for instance:\r\n-\tWIPO - D2000-0003 - Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows;\r\n-\tWIPO - D2000-0400 - CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. Dennis Toeppen.\r\nFurther the Complainant mentioned previous decisions of CAC UDRP Panels,\r\n- CAC - 101265 - Arcelormittal v. Fetty wap LLc Inc - <arcelormitals.com>;\r\n- CAC - 101267 - Arcelormittal v. davd anamo - <arcelormiltal.com>.\r\nReference in respect of prior rights and likelihood of confusion can be made also to:\r\n- CAC case N° 101036, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG vs. SKYRXSHOP <dulcolax.xyz>\r\n- WIPO Case no. D2014-0306 Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v. Klinik Sari Padma, BAKTI HUSADA\r\n\r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n",
    "rights": "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).",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "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).",
    "bad_faith": "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).",
    "procedural_factors": "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.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Dr. jur. Harald von Herget"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-03-18 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant provided evidence that it owns a trademark and domain name containing the letters “arcelormittal\", <arcelormittal.com>, registered well before the Respondent registered the disputed domain name. Further \"ArcelorMittal\" is the Company name and well-known.  ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "ARCELURMITTAL.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}