WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Tenaris Connections BV v. Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 1243357512 / Christopher Plunkett Case No. D2018-2848 1. The Parties

The Complainant is Tenaris Connections BV of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, represented by Mitrani, Caballero & Ruiz Moreno Abogados, Argentina.

The Respondent is Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 1243357512 of Toronto, Canada / Christopher Plunkett, of Macon, Georgia, United States of America (the “United States”). 2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name is registered with Google Inc. (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on December 12, 2018. On December 13, 2018, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On December 14, 2018, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the disputed domain name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on December 14, 2018 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amended Complaint on December 18, 2018.

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on December 19, 2018. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was January 8, 2019. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on January 9, 2019.

The Center appointed Edoardo Fano as the sole panelist in this matter on January 14, 2019. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.

The Panel has not received any requests from the Complainant or the Respondent regarding further submissions, waivers or extensions of deadlines, and the Panel has not found it necessary to request any further information from the Parties.

Having reviewed the communication records in the case file provided by the Center, the Panel finds that the Center has discharged its responsibility under the Rules, paragraph 2(a), “to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent”. Therefore, the Panel shall issue its Decision based upon the Complaint, the Policy, the Rules and the Supplemental Rules and without the benefit of a response from the Respondent.

The language of the proceeding is English, being the language of the Registration Agreement, as per paragraph 11(a) of the Rules. 4. Factual Background

The Complainant is Tenaris Connections BV, a Dutch company belonging to the international holding company Tenaris S.A., organized in Luxembourg, and owning the intellectual and industrial property rights of the Tenaris Group. Tenaris is a leading global manufacturer and supplier of steel pipe products and related services, owning several trademark registrations for TENARIS, among which:

- United States Trademark Registration No. 2,679,032 for TENARIS, registered on January 21, 2003,

- United States Trademark Registration No. 4,124,173 for TENARIS, registered on April 10, 2012.

The Complainant operates on the Internet at several websites, among which “”, “”, “”, “”, “”, “”.

The Complainant provided evidence in support of the above.

The disputed domain name was registered on October 16, 2018, according to the WhoIs records, and when the Complaint was filed the website at the disputed domain name was not active. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant

The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark TENNARIS, as the repeated “n” is a clear case of “typosquatting”.

Moreover, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name since it has not been authorized by the Complainant to register the disputed domain name or to use its trademark within the disputed domain name, nor is the Respondent commonly known by the disputed domain name. The Complainant asserts the Respondent is not making neither a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.

The Complainant submits that the R