{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105444", "time_of_filling": "2023-05-16 08:41:18", "domain_names": [ "inndusteel.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "INDUSTEEL FRANCE" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "optional accesss" ], "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><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The Complainant, a subsidiary of ArcelorMittal, is specialized in the production of hot rolled as well as forged steel plates, ingots and formed pieces, with the largest dimension range worldwide.<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. The Complainant is the owner of the Complainant’s Trademark and also of owner of several domain names comprising the term “INDUSTEEL”, such as the domain names <industeel-france.com>, registered in 2018, and <industeel.net>, registered since 2006.<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. The disputed domain name resolves to an index page and its MX servers are configured.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    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:<\/span>

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

    (i) Disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s Trademark as it contains an obvious misspelling of the Complainant’s Trademarks. Mere addition of letter \"n\" to the disputed domain name is not sufficient to exclude the likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s Trademarks.<\/span>

    (ii) <\/span>Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and he is not related in any way with the Complainant. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s Trademarks or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.<\/p>\n

    (iii) Disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. Given the distinctiveness of Complainant's Trademarks and their reputation, the Complainant contends that it is inconceivable that the Respondent could have registered the disputed domain name without actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in the Complainant's Trademarks. Furthermore, the disputed domain name resolves to an index page and MX servers are configured. The Complainant contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity in respect of the disputed domain name, and it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain name by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law. As prior WIPO UDRP panels have held, the incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use.<\/span>

    THE RESPONDENT:<\/span>

    The Respondent did not provide any response to the complaint.<\/span><\/p>", "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 Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (\"UDRP<\/strong>\" or \"Policy<\/strong>\").<\/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).<\/p>\n

    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).<\/p>\n

    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": "2023-06-10 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

    The Complainant is the owner of INDUSTEEL® trademarks, such as:<\/p>\n

      \n
    • International trademark n° 745241 INDUSTEEL® filing date on 5 October 2000; or<\/li>\n
    • EU trademark n° 1920438 INDUSTEEL® filing date on 6 October 2000.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      (\"Complainant's Trademarks<\/strong>\")<\/p>\n

      The disputed domain name <inndusteel.com> was registered on 1 May 2023.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "inndusteel.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }