{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105116", "time_of_filling": "2023-01-09 09:17:48", "domain_names": [ "aircelormittal.com" ], "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "ARCELORMITTAL" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "global hamed" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

As the Respondent did not file any response to the complaint, the Panel took into account the following facts asserted by the Complainant (and supported by the documentary evidence submitted by the Complainant) and unchallenged by the Respondent:<\/span>

(a) the Complainant is the largest steel and mining company in the world and is the market leader in steel for use in automotive, construction, household appliances and packaging. It holds sizeable captive supplies of raw materials and operates extensive distribution networks;<\/span>

(b) the Complainant is the owner of the Complainant’s Trademark;<\/span>

(c) the Complainant owns various domain names including the same distinctive wording ARCELORMITTAL;<\/span>

(d) the disputed domain name was registered on 28 December 2022; and<\/span>

(e) under the disputed domain name there was a website displaying sponsored links.<\/span>

The Complainant seeks transfer of the disputed domain name to the Complainant.<\/span><\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

THE COMPLAINANT:

In addition to the above factual assertions, the Complainant also contends the following:<\/span><\/p>\n

(i) the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s Trademark;<\/span>

(ii) the disputed domain name is also a clear case of \"typosquatting“, i.e. the disputed domain name contains an obvious misspelling of Complainant’s Trademark;<\/span>

(iii) the Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant nor authorized by it in any way to use Complainant’s Trademark. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent;<\/span>

(iv) the website operated under the disputed domain name contains parking page displaying pay per click links. The Complainant contends that this is not legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name;<\/span>

(v) registering the disputed domain name with the misspelling of the Complainant’s Trademark was intentional attempt to create confusing similarity with the Complainant’s trademarks and thus the registration was done in bad faith; and<\/span>

(vi) the Respondent uses the disputed domain name in connection with a website which points to a parking webpage displaying sponsored links. The Complainant contends that this use is only made to attract internet traffic for commercial again and thus constitutes bad faith conduct.<\/span><\/p>\n

THE RESPONDENT:

The Respondent did not provide any response to the complaint.<\/span><\/span><\/p>", "rights": "

The Panel concluded that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s Trademark within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (\"UDRP\" or \"Policy\").<\/span>

For details, please see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".<\/span><\/p>", "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.<\/span>

For details, please see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".<\/span><\/p>", "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.<\/span>

For details, please see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".<\/span><\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Michal Matějka" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-02-09 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the registered owner of international word trademark “ArcelorMittal”, reg. no. 947686, filed on 25 May 2007, registered on 3 August 2007, registered for goods and services in classes 6, 7, 9, 12, 19, 21, 39, 40, 41 and 42 (“Complainant’s Trademark”).<\/span>

The disputed domain name <aircelormittal.com> was registered on 28 December 2022.<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "aircelormittal.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }