Cnwarman.com

The timeline behind cnwarman.com

Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.

Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.

ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Weir Minerals Australia Limited v. 乔路飞 (qiao lu fei), 石家庄沃尔曼泵业有限 公司 (shi jia zhuang wo er man beng ye you xian gong si) Case No. D2026-3483 1. The Parties The Complainant is Weir Minerals Australia Limited, Australia, internally represented. The Respondent is 乔路飞 (qiao lu fei), 石家庄沃尔曼泵业有限公司 (shi jia zhuang wo er man beng ye you xian gong si), China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name <cnwarman.com> is registered with Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd. d/b/a HiChina (www.net.cn) (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History The Complaint in English was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on August 6, 2026. On August 6, 2026, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On August 7, 2026, 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 (unknown, The RDAP server redacted the value) and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on August 10, 2026, 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 in English on August 14, 2026. On August 10, 2026, the Center informed the Parties in Chinese and English, that the language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name is Chinese. On August 14, 2026, the Complainant requested English to be the language of the proceeding. The Respondent did not submit any comment on the Complainant’s submission. 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”). page 2 In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent in Chinese and English of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on August 19, 2026. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was September 8, 2026. The Respondent did not submit any Response by the due date. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on September 12, 2026. The Respondent sent an email communication in Chinese to the Center on September 13, 2026. The Center appointed Deanna Wong Wai Man as the sole panelist in this matter on September 19, 2026. 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. 4. Factual Background The Complainant is Weir Minerals Australia Limited, an Australian company and subsidiary of The Weir Group PLC (“Weir”). Weir was founded in 1871 and operates internationally in the engineering and mining technology sectors. The Complainant forms part of Weir’s Minerals division and is engaged in the manufacture and provision of mill circuit pumps, technology and services, as well as slurry handling equipment and associated spare parts for abrasive, high-wear applications in the mining industry. Weir acquired Warman International as part of its global expansion into the mining market. The Complainant owns an international trademark portfolio for the WARMAN mark, including the following registered trademarks: Australian Trademark Registration No. 130107, for WARMAN, registered from November 22, 1956; and China Trademark Registration No. 298989, for WARMAN, registered on September 20, 1987. The Complainant also owns additional trademark registrations for WARMAN in numerous jurisdictions. The disputed domain name was registered on November 14, 2022. At the time of the filing of the Complaint, the disputed domain name resolved to an active website in Chinese operated under the name “石家庄沃尔曼 泵业有限公司” (“shi jia zhuang wo er man beng ye you xian gong si” in Pinyin, which may be transliterated as “Shijiazhuang Warman Pump Industry Co., Ltd.”). The website provides information about and advertises pump products and pump parts and repeatedly refers to these products as being “沃尔曼” (“Wo Er Man” in Pinyin, which may be transliterated as “Warman”) products, including slurry pumps and related components. The website also invites users to contact an email address using the disputed domain name, and states that the business is located in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China. The Panel notes that on the date of this Decision this website is still online. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant The Complainant contends that it has satisfied each of the elements required under the Policy for a transfer of the disputed domain name. Notably, the Complainant contends that it owns extensive trademark rights in WARMAN, including more than 160 registrations worldwide, with the earliest word-mark registration dating from 1956 in Australia and registrations also covering China, where the Respondent is purportedly located. It submits that WARMAN has been used continuously in relation to pumps, pump parts, and related products and has acquired a significant and widespread reputation. The Complainant further contends that the disputed domain name incorporates the WARMAN trademark in its entirety, with only the addition of the letters “cn”, which are associated with China and the apparent location of the Respondent. It also relies on the fact that WARMAN appears throughout the associated website in connection with pumps and pump parts. page 3 As to the second element, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name because it has not been authorized to use the WARMAN trademark and has no commercial relationship with the Complainant or any entity within The Weir Group. The Complainant further contends that there is no evidence that the Respondent has been commonly known by the disputed domain name or the WARMAN trademark. It submits that the Respondent’s website uses WARMAN, and phonetically similar variants, in connection with pumps and pump parts and contains statements referring to the historical importation of “Warman” series slurry pumps from an Australian company, which allegedly create the misleading impression that the Respondent is a licensee, distributor, or otherwise authorized by the Complainant. As to the third element, the Complainant contends that the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith by intentionally attracting Internet users to its commercial website through a likelihood of confusion with the WARMAN trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website and the products offered there. The Complainant relies in particular on the Respondent’s use of the WARMAN trademark in the disputed domain name and throughout the associated website, the Respondent’s activities in the same field of slurry pumps and pump parts, and the prior UDRP proceeding concerning <warmanslurrypump.com>, (Weir Minerals Australia Limited v. 乔路飞 (Qiao Lu Fei), WIPO Case No. D2022-4512), involving the same trademark and the same Respondent. The Complainant further contends that the Respondent’s conduct falls within paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. B. Respondent The Respondent did not file a formal Response within the prescribed deadline. On September 13, 2026, after expiry of the deadline, the Respondent sent an email to the Center essentially stating that its website is entirely in Chinese and that it does not conduct international business. 6. Discussion and Findings 6.1. Preliminary Issue: Language of the Proceeding The language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name is Chinese. Pursuant to the Rules, paragraph 11(a), in the absence of an agreement between the parties, or unless specified otherwise in the registration agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the registration agreement. The Complaint was filed in English. The Complainant requested that the language of the proceeding be English for several reasons, including the fact that the disputed domain name is composed entirely of Latin characters and incorporates its WARMAN trademark in its entirety, with the prefix “cn” also being a Latin- character abbreviation commonly understood to refer to China. The Complainant further submitted that, although the associated website is principally in Chinese, it repeatedly uses the WARMAN trademark and addresses the same field of business as the Complainant, including slurry pumps and pump parts. The Complainant also submitted that requiring translation of the Complaint and annexes would cause unnecessary cost and delay. The Respondent did not make any specific submissions with respect to the language of the proceeding. After the deadline for filing a Response had expired, on September 13, 2026, the Respondent sent an email to the Center in Chinese stating that its website is entirely in Chinese and that it has no international business. In exercising its discretion to use a language other than that of the registration agreement, the Panel has to exercise such discretion judicially in the spirit of fairness and justice to both parties, taking into account all relevant circumstances of the case, including matters such as the parties’ ability to understand and use the proposed language, time and costs (see WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Select UDRP Questions (“WIPO Overview 3.1”), section 4.5.1). page 4 Having considered all the matters above, the Panel determines under paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that the language of the proceeding shall be English. 6.2. Decision on the Merits A. Identical or Confusingly Similar It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. The standing (or threshold) test for confusing similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightforward comparison between the Complainant’s trademark and the disputed domain name. WIPO Overview 3.1, section 1.7. The Complainant has shown rights in respect of a trademark or service mark for the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.1, section 1.2.1. The entirety of the mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.1, section 1.7. Although the addition of another term here, “cn”, may bear on assessment of the second and third elements, the Panel finds the addition of such term does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the mark for the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.1, section 1.8. The Panel finds the first element of the Policy has been established. B. Rights or Legitimate Interests Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name. Although the overall burden of proof in UDRP proceedings is on the complainant, panels have recognized that proving that a respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in a domain name may result in the difficult task of “proving a negative”, requiring information that is often primarily within the knowledge or control of the respondent. As such, where a complainant makes out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to the respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name (although the burden of proof always remains on the complainant). If the respondent fails to come forward with such relevant evidence, the complainant is deemed to have satisfied the second element. WIPO Overview 3.1, section 2.1. Having reviewed the available record, the Panel finds the Complainant has established a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent has not rebutted the Complainant’s prima facie showing and has not come forward with any relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name such as those enumerated in the Policy or otherwise. The Panel notes that the Complainant has not licensed, authorized, or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use its WARMAN trademark or to register a domain name incorporating that trademark and that there is also no evidence of any affiliation or other relationship between the Parties. Further, the Panel notes that there is no evidence that the Respondent has been commonly known by the disputed domain name. Additionally, the evidence in this proceeding contains no indications of demonstrable preparations by the Respondent to use the disputed domain name in connection with a legitimate noncommercial or fair use or with a bona fide offering of goods or services. Instead, the evidence shows that the disputed domain name is actively being used to host a commercial website purportedly offering pumps and pump parts and prominently uses “沃尔曼”, which may be transliterated as Warman, in connection with those products, while not clearly and prominently disclosing the absence of any relationship with the Complainant. The Panel is of page 5 the view that the foregoing elements illustrate that the Respondent was not acting as a good faith provider of goods or services under the disputed domain name, see also Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2001-0903. In addition, there is also no evidence on record showing that the Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name. Moreover, the nature of the disputed domain name, which incorporates the Complainant’s mark together with the letters “cn”, a common abbreviation for “China”, creates a risk of implied affiliation by suggesting to Internet users that the disputed domain name is associated with, endorsed by, or operated by the Complainant, when in fact no such connection exists. The Panel finds the second element of the Policy has been established. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith The Panel notes that, for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, paragraph 4(b) of the Policy establishes circumstances, in particular, but without limitation, that, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith. In the present case, the Panel finds that the circumstances indicate that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant’s WARMAN trademark when it registered the disputed domain name. The Complainant’s rights in the WARMAN trademark substantially predate the registration of the disputed domain name, as the evidence shows that the Complainant has held WARMAN trademark registrations in Australia since 1956 and in China since 1987, which is decades before the registration date of the disputed domain name. The disputed domain name also incorporates the WARMAN trademark in its entirety, together with the letters “cn”, which are commonly understood as referring to China, where the Respondent is located. The Panel has also taken into account the prior decision in Weir Minerals Australia Limited v. 乔路飞 (Qiao Lu Fei), WIPO Case No. D2022-4512, concerning <warmanslurrypump.com>. In that proceeding, the panel found that the Complainant’s WARMAN trademarks and related products and services were widely known and recognized, and that the respondent was likely aware of the WARMAN trademarks when registering the domain name. While those findings do not determine the present dispute, they are relevant circumstances and support the inference that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant and its WARMAN trademark when registering the disputed domain name. Additionally, having regard to the actual use made of the disputed domain name as a commercial website concerning pumps and pump parts, the Panel finds that this further confirms that the Respondent was targeting the Complainant’s distinctive and reputable WARMAN marks by the registration of the disputed domain name. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of any explanation from the Respondent as to its choice of the disputed domain name, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith. As to the use of the disputed domain name in bad faith, the disputed domain name currently resolves to an active commercial website purportedly offering pumps and pump parts which prominently uses “沃尔曼”, which may be transliterated as Warman, in its business name, website headings, product descriptions, and other content. In the Panel’s view, this use is directed at attracting Internet users interested in pumps associated with the Complainant’s WARMAN trademark, and the Panel therefore accepts that, by using the disputed domain name in this manner, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website or the products offered on it. This constitutes direct evidence of bad faith under paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. See WIPO Overview 3.1, section 3.1.4. The Panel finds that the Complainant has established the third element of the Policy. page 6 7. Decision For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name <cnwarman.com> be transferred to the Complainant. /Deanna Wong Wai Man/ Deanna Wong Wai Man Sole Panelist Date: September 30, 2026

Source of record: WIPO . Reproduced for research; WIPO is the authoritative source.