{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107876", "time_of_filling": "2025-08-29 09:47:44", "domain_names": [ "lyondellbesall.cam" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "LyondellBasell Industries Holdings B.V. " ], "complainant_representative": "Claudio Tamburrino (Barzanò & Zanardo S.p.A.)", "respondent": [ "mohammedreza heidari" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

FACTS PROVIDED BY THE COMPLAINANT:<\/strong><\/p>\n

LyondellBasell Group (referred to as LyondellBasell) is a multinational chemical company and the third largest plastics, chemicals and refining company and the largest licensor of polyethylene and polypropylene technologies in the world, for which it detains over 6,200 patents and patent applications worldwide.<\/p>\n

According to the 2024 annual report, LyondellBasell generated $1.4 billion in net income and EBITDA of $4.3 billion. LyondellBasell is listed on the New York Stock Exchange since 2010.<\/p>\n

LyondellBasell Group is formed of various affiliated companies, including the Complainant, all of them under the ultimate control of LyondellBasell Industries N.V., headquartered in the Netherlands.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The Complainant is the owner of the different trademarks LYONDELLBASELL®. In addition, Lyondell Chemical Company, a company belonging to LyondellBasell’s group, is the owner of the EUTM trademark LYONDELL (word mark) No. 1001866. LyondellBasell Industries N.V. owns multiple domain names consisting in, inter alia, the wordings “LYONDELLBASELL” and “LYONDELL”.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The disputed domain name <lyondellbesall.cam> (hereinafter, the “Disputed Domain Name”) was registered on August 08th, 2025 through the privacy protect service Withheld for Privacy ehf, and, despite currently not redirected to an active web page but prima facie to an undeveloped website, it is set up with active MX records, indicating that it is used to send and receive emails. Moreover, the domain name has already been used and it’s still already used for scam attempts. It is therefore clear that the Disputed Domain Name has been registered to be involved in storage spoofing\/phishing.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

According to Complainant’s non-contested allegations, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the Disputed Domain Name, and he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

For the purpose of this case, the Registrar confirmed that the Respondent is the current registrant of the Disputed Domain Name and that the language of the registration agreement is English.<\/p>\n

Respondent did not reply to the Complaint.<\/p>\n

NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.<\/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": "

LEGAL GROUNDS:<\/p>\n

COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n

PRELIMINARY PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS<\/p>\n

LyondellBasell Industries N.V., LyondellBasell Industries Holdings B.V., Lyondell Chemie Nederland B.V. and Lyondell Chemical Company are related companies belonging to the same group and having right in the relevant marks on which this Complaint is based.<\/p>\n

According to the UDRP jurisprudence any one party of multiple related parties, on behalf of the other interested parties, may bring a Complaint and is to be considered to have standing in dispute (see paragraph 1.4.2 of WIPO Overview 3.0 and the decisions mentioned thereto).<\/p>\n

The Complainant of this administrative proceeding is LyondellBasell Industries Holdings B.V., filer of this Complaint also on behalf of the other interested parties (Lyondell Chemie Nederland B.V., LyondellBasell Industries N.V. and Lyondell Chemical Company). The transfer decision is to be directed to the Complainant.<\/p>\n

First element: Similarity<\/p>\n

The Complainant indicates that under the first UDRP element, the straightforward side-by-side comparison of the Disputed Domain Name and the textual components of the marks on which this Complaint is based makes it evident that the LYONDELLBASELL Trademarks and the LYONDELL Trademarks are recognizable within the Disputed Domain Name and, thus, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the marks in which the Complainant has rights. The Complainant states that in UDRP cases where a Disputed Domain Name incorporates the entirety of a trademark, or where at least a dominant feature of the relevant mark is recognizable in the Disputed Domain Name, the Disputed Domain Name will normally be considered confusingly similar to that mark under the first element of the UDRP.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, the Complainant indicates that by comparing - in particular - the Disputed Domain Name to the LYONDELLBASELL Trademarks and to the domain name <lyondellbasell.com>, the only difference is the exchange of two letters, the vowel “a” and “e” composing the word BASELL: in the Disputed Domain Name the two letters are reversed creating the very similar word BESALL. Such a difference neither affects the attractive power of such trademark, nor is sufficient to prevent the finding of confusing similarity between the Disputed Domain Name and such mark, as it is a clear typo.<\/p>\n

Second element: Rights or legitimate interest<\/p>\n

The Complainant contend that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name for the following reasons:<\/p>\n

- The Complainant (or the other related parties) has no relationship with the Respondent whatsoever.<\/p>\n

- The Respondent has never received any approval of the Complainant (or the other related parties), expressed or implied, to use its (their) trademarks or any other mark identical or confusingly similar to such marks, nor to register any domain name identical or confusingly similar to such marks.<\/p>\n

- There is no evidence that the Respondent has acquired any rights in a trademark or trade name corresponding to the Disputed Domain Name.<\/p>\n

- The Disputed Domain Name is not redirected to an active website and it has been used to send scam emails. In accordance with the Complainant, such use of the Disputed Domain Name is clearly not a bona fide, legitimate or fair use under the UDRP Policy, but clearly demonstrate that it has been registered to be used for phishing activities\/storage Spoofing.<\/p>\n

Third element: Bad faith<\/p>\n

The Complainant asserts that the Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s well- known prior trademarks.<\/p>\n

Given the distinctiveness and reputation of the Complainant’s business and trademarks worldwide, the Complainant believes that it is inconceivable that the Respondent could have registered the Disputed Domain Name without actual knowledge of LyondellBasell and its rights in such marks. Thus, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainants and their marks.<\/p>\n

A finding of Bad Faith is also supported by the use of the Disputed Domain Name, as described at the factual section:<\/p>\n