DECISION
Amrize Technology Switzerland LLC v. bridget walker / Walker enterprises
Claim Number: FA2508002170245
PARTIES
Complainant is Amrize Technology Switzerland LLC ("Complainant"), represented by Lindy M. Herman of Rutan & Tucker LLP, California, USA. Respondent is bridget walker / Walker enterprises ("Respondent"), Missouri, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <amrlze.com>, registered with NameCheap, Inc.
PANEL
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
James Bridgeman SC as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on August 7, 2025; Forum received payment on August 7, 2025.
On August 8, 2025, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <amrlze.com> domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameCheap, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc. registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").
On August 12, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of September 2, 2025, by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@amrlze.com.
Also on August 12, 2025, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
Having received no response from Respondent, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On September 4, 2025, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed James Bridgeman SC as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the disputed domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
PARTIES' CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
Complainant claims rights in the AMRIZE trademark, based on its ownership of the trademark registrations described above and use of the mark as a supplier of building materials.
Complainant asserts that its parent corporation has a global presence, with operations in numerous countries, annual revenue of CHF 16.3 billion in 2024, and assets valued at CHF 52.69 billion in 2023.
The AMRIZE brand was officially adopted in March 2025, following a name change to Amrize Technology Switzerland GmbH.
Complainant firstly alleges that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the AMRIZE mark in which Complainant has rights because it consists of Complainant's trademark AMRIZE, with an intentional misspelling, replacing the letter "i" with a lowercase letter "l", in combination with the generic Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") extension <.com>.
Secondly, Complainant alleges that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name because:
· Respondent has no trademark rights in AMRIZE or AMRLZE;
· Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name;
· Respondent is not an authorized provider of Complainant's goods or services;
· the Whois information for the disputed domain name does not indicate any legitimate connection to the AMRIZE mark;
· Complainant has never licensed or permitted Respondent to use its trademarks;
· the disputed domain name is passively held; it does not resolve to any active website; but it has been configured for email use, facilitating fraudulent activity; and
· Respondent is shown to be using the disputed domain name to impersonate Complainant and conduct phishing schemes as shown in a copy of an email purporting to have been sent by a exhibited in an annex to the Complaint.
Thirdly, Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith arguing:
· that Complainant's rights in the AMRIZE mark pre-date the registration of the disputed domain name;
· there is no plausible reason for Respondent to register the disputed domain name other than to target Complainant's trademark;
· Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in AMRIZE at the time of registration and its use of a misspelling of Complainant's mark to create the disputed domain name constitutes typosquatting, a deliberate attempt to confuse users and trade off the goodwill of the AMRIZE mark; and
· Respondent has used the disputed domain name to create an email account from which it has sent phishing email messages impersonating Complainant in phishing emails purporting to deceive Complainant's customers as shown in a copy of an email exhibited in an annex to the Complaint.
Additionally Complainant argues that Respondent has provided false WhoIs contact information, including a misleading address and phone number, which is indicative of registration and use in bad faith.
In conclusion, Complainant submits that Respondent's behavior engaging in typosquatting, passively holding the disputed domain name, and sending phishing messages constitutes bad faith under UDRP Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii) and ¶ 4(a)(iii)
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
FINDINGS
Complainant is a provider of building materials using the AMRIZE name for which it holds a large portfolio of trademark and service mark registrations and pending applications including the following registrations
· Australian registered trademark AMRIZE, registration number 2547962 – Issued July 29, 2025 for goods and services in classes 1 2, 6, 9, 17, 19, 20, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41. 42,
· Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba registered trademark AMRIZE, registration number 1856692, registered on February 19, 2025, for goods and services in classes 9, 17, 19, 20, 35, 36. 37, 40, 41and 42;
· Monaco registered trademark AMRIZE, registration number 1854400, registered on July 31, 2025.
Complainant has an established Internet presence and maintains its website at <www.amrize.com>.
The disputed domain name <amrlze.com> was registered on June 30, 2025, and has been used to send a phishing email.
There is no information available about Respondent, except for that provided in the Complaint as amended, the Registrar's Whois for the disputed domain name, and the Registrar's response to the request by Forum for registration details of the disputed domain name.
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) ("Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint").
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has provided uncontested convincing evidence of its rights in the AMRIZE trademark established by its the ownership of the abovementioned portfolio of trademark registration.
The disputed domain name <amrlze.com> is composed of a misspelling of Complainant's mark in combination with the Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") extension <.com>.
Complainant's mark is clearly referenced within the disputed domain name. The substitution of the letter "l" for the letter "i" would go unnoticed by most readers familiar with Complainant's mark.
The generic Top-Level Domain ("gTLD") extension <.com> within the disputed domain name may be ignored for the purposes of comparing the mark and the disputed domain name, because it would be considered by Internet users to be a necessary technical element for a domain name.
This Panel finds therefore that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the AMRIZE mark in which Complainant has rights and Complainant has therefore succeeded in the first element of the test in Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Rights or Legitimate Interests
Complainant has made out a prima facie case that the Respondent has no rights legitimate interests in the disputed domain name as set out in Complainant's detailed submissions above.
Complainant has shown that the disputed domain name, which does not resolve to any active website has been used to send phishing email correspondence to a customer of Complainant. The email falsely purports to be sent by Complainant in relation to new methods of payment of its accounts.
It is well established that once a complainant makes out a prima facie case that a respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name at issue, the burden of production shifts to the respondent to prove its rights or legitimate interests.
Respondent has failed to discharge that burden and therefore this Panel must find that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
Complainant has therefore succeeded in the second element of the test in Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
Complainant's registered service mark rights in the mark predate the registration of the disputed domain name. The earliest trademark registration for AMRIZE relied upon by Complainant is in Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, registration number 1856692, registered on February 19, 2025, whereas the disputed domain name was not registered until June 30, 2025.
Complainant has provided details of the fame and goodwill of its parent corporation, which is of limited probative value in proving use of the AMRIZE mark which has been recently adopted and many of the trademark applications for the mark have not yet been granted.
Nonetheless it is improbable that the registrant of the disputed domain name was unaware of Complainant's mark when the disputed domain name was chosen and registered, because it an obvious intentional misspelling of Complainant's mark.
AMRIZE is an unusual and distinctive trademark and the disputed domain name has no meaning other than as a misspelling of Complainant's mark replacing the letter "i" with the lower case letter "l".
On the evidence there appears to be no plausible reason for registering the disputed domain name other than to create an association with Complainant and its AMRIZE.
On the balance of probabilities, therefore, this Panel finds that the disputed domain name was in fact chosen and registered with Complainant's mark in mind with the intention of taking predatory advantage of Complainant's rights and goodwill in the AMRIZE mark; and that by intentionally registering and using the disputed domain name which is a misspelling of Complainant's mark Respondent is engaged in typosquatting
Complainant has exhibited a copy of an email message sent by Respondent using the disputed domain name as an email address. The message is sent to an unsuspecting recipient, which is a customer of Complainant.
The email message states: "Please when can we expect all our outstanding payments? Additionally, we have just made upgrades to our billing system as part of a larger initiative to streamline our accounts payable process, we are in the process of moving ll of our transition to paperless transactions and requesting that our customers do the same thing. We are receiving all outstanding and further payments through ACH to our operating bank account, this is in support of our new billing system."
The Panel accepts Complainant's submission that the email message illustrates that Respondent is using the disputed domain name to carry out a phishing scam.
On the balance of probabilities, therefore the Panel finds that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
As this Panel has found that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith, Complainant has succeeded in the third element of the test in Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
DECISION
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <amrlze.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant .
_______________________________________
James Bridgeman SC, Panelist
Dated: September 4, 2025
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page