{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-108023", "time_of_filling": "2025-10-06 10:21:43", "domain_names": [ "arcelormittol.online", "arcelomittol.online" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "ARCELORMITTAL" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "Henrique Gomes", "Getulio aragao Gerulio" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

A<\/strong>. <\/span>The Complainant<\/strong>'<\/span>s position<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant asserts that it is the world's leading steel producer, with significant operations across multiple sectors, and that it produced 57.9 million tons of crude steel in 2024.<\/p>\n

B<\/strong>. Respondent<\/strong>'s position<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has filed no Response. <\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "

The Panel is not aware of any pending or concluded legal proceedings concerning the domain names <arcelormittol.online> and <arcelomittol.online> (together, \"the disputed domain names\"<\/em>).<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

A<\/strong>. The Complainant<\/strong><\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.1 Preliminary Issue <\/strong>– Consolidation of the Proceedings<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant seeks <\/strong>consolidation of its claims against the two registrants of the disputed domain names. It relies on the similarities between the domain names and the websites to which they resolved, asserting that both registrants are under common control.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.2 Substantive grounds<\/strong><\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.2<\/strong>.1 The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are deliberate misspellings of the trade mark ARCELORMTTAL, amounting to typographical imitation. The substitution of the letter \"a\" for \"o\", and the omission of the letter \"r\", do not prevent a finding of confusing similarity. The Top-Level Domain (\"TLD\") (<.online>) is disregarded for the purpose of comparison.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.2<\/strong>.2 The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent is not known by the disputed domain names, nor has it been authorised by the Complainant to use its trade mark. The evidence indicates that the disputed domain names were used to promote competing steel products, which cannot constitute a bona fide<\/em> offering of goods or services.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.2<\/strong>.3 The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain names in bad faith<\/strong><\/p>\n

Given the notoriety of the trade mark ARCELORMITTAL, the Complainant submits that the Respondent must have been aware of it when registering the disputed domain names. Their use to attract users to competing websites, and the configuration of MX records suggesting potential misuse for e-mail purposes, further support a finding of bad faith.<\/p>\n

A.2.4 Relief sought<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant requests the transfer of the disputed domain names.<\/p>\n

B<\/strong>. <\/span>The Respondent<\/strong><\/p>\n

No Response was filed. The Panel therefore proceeds on the unchallenged evidence submitted by the Complainant.  <\/p>", "rights": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the UDRP 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 names (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the UDRP Policy).<\/p>", "bad_faith": "

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 UDRP Policy).<\/p>", "procedural_factors": "

<\/strong>1<\/strong>. Consolidation<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel has considered the Complainant's request for consolidation in light of Rules 10(b), 10(c) of the UDRP Rules, and paragraph 4.11.2 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions (\"the WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0<\/em>\").<\/p>\n

The disputed domain names share a number of common characteristics:<\/p>\n

i. They were registered on the same date, through the same registrar, under the same <.online> TLD;<\/p>\n

ii. Each incorporates a near-identical typographical variant of the Complainant's trade mark;<\/p>\n

iii. The registrants are both located in Brazil, with contact email addresses of a similar format; and<\/p>\n

iv. The websites to which the disputed domain names resolved were, on the evidence, identical in appearance and content.<\/p>\n

The Panel considers it implausible that these registrations occurred independently. It therefore finds that the disputed domain names are under common control. Consolidation is accordingly granted as consistent with procedural efficiency and fairness to all parties.<\/p>\n

2<\/strong>. Procedural compliance<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements have been met and that the matter is properly before it for determination.   <\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Yana Zhou" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-11-09 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant, ArcelorMittal, is a global steel manufacturer and the proprietor of the following registered trade mark:<\/p>\n