The Complainant is the world’s leading steel company with 57,9 million of tons of crude steel made in 2024.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Complainant also owns an important domain names portfolio, including the trademark ARCELOR or ARCELORMITTAL, such as <arcelor.com> registered since August 29, 2001 and <arcelormittal.com> registered since January 27, 2006<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent on May 12, 2025, and resolved to a website offering financial services. A couple of hours after the filing of the Complaint, the website content has been suppressed and the disputed domain name lands to an \"error page\".<\/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": "
Complainant<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant claims that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark ARCELOR. The Complainant alleges that the addition of the generic term \"ATENDIMENTO\" (meaning \"services\" in the Portuguese language) to the Complainant's trademark ARCELOR is not sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.<\/p>\n The Complainant further alleges that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n Specifically, Complainant alleges that (i) Respondent is not identified in the Whois database by the disputed domain name but as \"<\/span>Andressa Guzzo Guimaraes\" (after waiving of the Whois data) and is in no way related to Complainant, (ii) Complainant does not perform any activity for, nor has any business with, Respondent, (iii) that the disputed domain name is reproducing identically the Complainant's trademark combined with a generic and descriptive term, and (iv) that the disputed domain name resolves to a website offering unrelated financial services by using ARCELORMITTAL [misprint for ARCELOR as deduced by the Panel, ed.<\/em>]. <\/p>\n The Complainant alleges that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. The Complainant asserts that the ARCELOR and ARCELORMITTAL trademarks are widely known. The Complainant also notes that the reputation of the ARCELORMITTAL trademark has been confirmed, inter alia, in previous CAC cases No. 101908 and No. 101667.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant alleges that, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's mark and its reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's mark.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the Complainant alleges that (i) the combination of a descriptive term and the trademark ARCELOR is intentionally designed to be confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark, (ii) the Respondent has demonstrated an activity with respect to unrelated financial services. The inclusion of a known trademark in a domain name, coupled with an active website referring to some extent to the Complainant, including photographs of a building bearing the Complainant's Trademark, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use.<\/p>\n Respondent<\/strong><\/p>\n No administratively compliant response has been submitted by the Respondent.<\/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 Policy).<\/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>",
"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>",
"procedural_factors": " The Centre notified the Respondent about the administrative proceeding via available means of communication: email notification and written notice.<\/span><\/p>\n It ought to be indicated that the Centre sent the Complaint to the Respondent, but neither the written notice of the Complaint nor the advice of delivery thereof was returned to the Center. No other address for correspondence was found on the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n The notice of the Commencement of the administrative proceeding was sent also by e-mail. Yet, the e-mail notice sent to <\/span><postmaster@arceloratendimento.online> <\/span>was returned back undelivered as the e-mail address had permanent fatal errors.<\/span><\/p>\n The e-mail notice was also sent to<\/span> <andressaguzzoguimaraes@gmail.com>, but the Centre never received any proof of delivery or notification of non-delivery. No further e-mail addresses could be found on the disputed site.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n The Respondent never accessed the online platform<\/span>. <\/span><\/p>\n 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.<\/span><\/p>",
"decision": "Accepted",
"panelists": [
"David-Irving Tayer"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2025-06-20 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant is the owner of:<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant further owns domain names <arcelormittal.com> registered since January 27, 2006 and <arcelor.com> registered since August 29, 2001.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The disputed domain name <<\/span>arceloratendimento.online> was registered on May 12, 2025 and was active up to the filing of the Complaint.<\/span><\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"arceloratendimento.online": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}\n