{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104154", "time_of_filling": "2021-11-11 08:58:03", "domain_names": [ "mittalsteelgroup.com" ], "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "ARCELORMITTAL S.A." ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "qi bing Xue" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its MITTAL STEEL mark on the basis that the disputed domain name includes the trademark in its entirety. The addition of the descriptive term “GROUP” and gTLD “.com” are insufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its MITTAL STEEL mark. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant also argues that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and is not authorized or licensed by the Complainant to make any use of the Complainant’s MITTAL STEEL mark or register the disputed domain name. Further, the Respondent did not make any use of the disputed domain name since registration and has been passively holding the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant further asserts that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith as the Respondent should have known of the Complainant’s MITTAL STEEL mark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name given the distinctiveness of its MITTAL STEEL mark and reputation. The disputed domain name is also passively held by the Respondent and resolved to an inactive webpage. \r\n", "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.", "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\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.\r\n\r\nPreliminary Issue: Language of Proceedings\r\n\r\nParagraph 11 of the Rules provides that:\r\n“(a) Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, or specified otherwise in the Registration Agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the Registration Agreement, subject to the authority of the Panel to determine otherwise, having regard to the circumstances of the administrative proceeding.”\r\nThe language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name is Chinese.\r\nThe Complainant requested that the language of the proceeding be English for the following reasons:\r\n-\tThe disputed domain name consists of Roman characters (ASCII) and not in Chinese script; and\r\n-\tThe disputed domain name consists of the trademark \"mittalsteel\" and English term \"group\".\r\n\r\nFor these reasons, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has knowledge of the English language. The Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding. \r\n\r\nThe Panel cites the following with approval: “Thus, the general rule is that the parties may agree on the language of the administrative proceeding. In the absence of this agreement, the language of the Registration Agreement shall dictate the language of the proceeding. \r\n\r\nHowever, the Panel has the discretion to decide otherwise having regard to the circumstances of the case. The Panel’s discretion must be exercised judicially in the spirit of fairness and justice to both parties taking into consideration matters such as command of the language, time and costs. It is important that the language finally decided by the Panel for the proceeding is not prejudicial to either one of the parties in his or her abilities to articulate the arguments for the case.” (See Groupe Auchan v. xmxzl, WIPO Case No. DCC2006 0004).\r\n\r\nHaving considered the above factors, the Panel determines that English be the language of the proceeding. The Panel agrees that the Respondent appear to be familiar with the English language, taking into account its selection of the English-language trademark and the domain name in dispute. In the absence of an objection by the Respondent, the Panel does not find it procedurally efficient to have the Complainant translate the Complaint and evidence into Chinese. \r\n\r\n", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Mr. Jonathan Agmon" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-12-23 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant, ARCELORMITTAL S.A., is the largest steel producing company worldwide (www.arcelormittal.com). It is one of the market leaders in steel for use in automotive, construction, household appliances and packaging with operations in more than 60 countries and holds sizeable captive supplies of raw materials and operates extensive distribution networks. \r\nThe Complainant is the owner of the following “MITTAL STEEL” registered trademark, European Trademark No. 4233301 for “MITTAL STEEL” registered on January 7, 2005.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also owns the domain name which comprises of its MITTAL STEEL mark since January 2, 2003.", "decision_domains": { "MITTALSTEELGROUP.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }