{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106615",
    "time_of_filling": "2024-06-17 10:46:47",
    "domain_names": [
        "arcelormittal-backoffice.com",
        "arcelormittal-service.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ARCELORMITTAL"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Eric  Philipson"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant is one of the largest steel producing companies in the world and is a market leader in steel for use in automotive, construction, household appliances and packaging with some 58 million tons of crude steel made in 2023. It operates an extensive international distribution network.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain names &lt;arcelormittal-backoffice.com&gt; and &lt;arcelormittal-service.com&gt; were registered on 13 June 2024 and resolve to inactive pages. MX servers have been configured in relation to both domain names.<\/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 names.<\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p>The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain names should be transferred to it. <br \/>No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark 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 names (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 names have been registered and are being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).<\/p>",
    "procedural_factors": "<p>The Panel notes that the amended complaint relates to two disputed domain names registered by the same Respondent, Eric Philipson, with the same registrar on the same date. The disputed domain names both resolve to inactive pages. The Panel considers it appropriate that the complaints against the disputed domain names are consolidated in a single UDRP proceeding for the following reasons: Paragraph 4(f) of the Policy provides that &ldquo;[i]n the event of multiple disputes between [a respondent] and a complainant, either [the respondent] or the complainant may petition to consolidate the disputes before a single Administrative Panel&hellip;.&rdquo; This is allowed where it &ldquo;promotes the shared interests of the parties in avoiding unnecessary duplication of time, effort and expense, reduces the potential for conflicting or inconsistent results arising from multiple proceedings, and generally furthers the fundamental objectives of the Policy.&rdquo; (See, for example, WIPO Case No D2009-0985, MLB Advanced Media, The Phillies, Padres LP v. OreNet, Inc.). Furthermore, paragraph 3(c) of the Rules provides that &ldquo;[t]he complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain-name holder&rdquo;, as is the case here. Not only have the disputed domain names at issue in this proceeding been registered by the same Respondent, but they were also registered on the same date and neither of them resolves to an active website. The Panel therefore concludes that it would be equitable and procedurally efficient to permit the consolidation of the disputed domain names into this single case.<\/p>\n<p>The Panel is satisfied that all other procedural requirements under UDRP were also met and that there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.<\/p>",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Gregor Kleinknecht LLM MCIArb"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-07-25 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The Complainant owns international trade mark registration No 947686 ARCELORMITTAL, first registered on 3 August 2007 in international classes 6, 7, 9, 12, 19, 21, 39, 40, 41, and 42. The Complainant's trade mark registration predates the registration of the disputed domain names.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the Complainant owns a portfolio of domain names consisting of the name ARCELORMITTAL, including the domain &lt;arcelormittal.com&gt;, registered on 27 January 2006, which is connected to the official website of the Complainant.<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "arcelormittal-backoffice.com": "TRANSFERRED",
        "arcelormittal-service.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}