{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104811",
    "time_of_filling": "2022-08-24 08:38:13",
    "domain_names": [
        "arcelormittal-saudi.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ARCELORMITTAL (SA)"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "steve chill"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>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 89.9 million tonnes crude steel made in 2019.<br \/><br \/>The disputed domain name was registered on 12 August 2022 and resolves to a parking page.<\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.<\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p>COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant says the addition of the geographic term &ldquo;SAUDI&rdquo; is not sufficient to escape the finding that the domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark and branded goods ARCELORMITTAL. It does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark ARCELORMITTAL. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and the domain name associated. It says it is well established that &ldquo;a domain name that wholly incorporates a Complainant&rsquo;s registered trademark may be sufficient to establish confusing similarity for purposes of the UDRP&rdquo; citing WIPO Case No. D2003-0888, Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG v. Vasiliy Terkin.<\/p>\n<p>As the disputed domain name resolves to a parking page, the Complainant says this demonstrates a lack of legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, citing: WIPO Case No. D2000-1164, <em>Boeing Co. v. Bressi (&ldquo;the Respondent has advanced no basis on which he could conclude that it has a right or legitimate interest in the domain names&rdquo;) <\/em>and<em> <\/em>the Forum Case No. FA 1773444, <em>Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. v. Joannet Macket \/ JM Consultants (&ldquo;The Panel finds that Respondent&rsquo;s lack of content at the disputed domain shows the lack of a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use per Policy &para;&para; 4(c)(i) and (iii).&rdquo;).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>As to Bad Faith, the Complainant says given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademark and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark. Citing WIPO Case No. DCO2018-0005, ArcelorMittal SA v. Tina Campbell (&ldquo;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.&rdquo;).<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p>RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n<p>NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>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).<\/p>",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "<p>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).<\/p>",
    "bad_faith": "<p>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).<\/p>",
    "procedural_factors": "<p>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.<\/p>",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Victoria McEvedy"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-09-29 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The Complainant relies on its rights as the owner and registered proprietor of the international trademark n&deg;947686 ArcelorMittal registered on 3 August 2007 registered in over 32 countries and in classes 06,07,09,12,19,21,39,40,41 and 42. <br \/><br \/>Those countries include AU - BQ - CW - EM - GE - IS - JP - KR - NO - SG - SX - SY - TR - US - UZ and AL - AM - AZ - BA - BY - CH - CN - CU - DZ - EG - HR - IR - KE - KG - KP - KZ - LR - MA - MC - MD - ME - MK - MN - RS - RU - SD - SM - TJ - UA - VN and SG - US. <br \/><br \/>It also relies on its extensive use in trade internationally, which makes it a well-known mark. <br \/><br \/>In common law jurisdictions it may have rights arising from use in trade. <br \/><br \/>The Complainant also owns a large domain name portfolio, including &lt;arcelormittal.com&gt; registered on 27 January 2006.<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "arcelormittal-saudi.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}