[D] Dealing with an unprofessional reviewer using fake references and personal attacks in ICML26

We are currently facing an ICML 2026 reviewer who lowered the score to a 1 (Confidence 5) while ignoring our rebuttal and relying on fake references and personal insults like "close-minded" and "hostile." Despite my other reviewers giving 5s, this individual is using mathematically nonsensical proofs and making baseless accusations about MIT license/anonymity violations, all while using aggressive formatting and strange syntax errors (e.g., bolding ending with periods like **.). The reviewer is also constantly editing their "PS" section to bait Program Chair attention and bias the discussion phase. I’ve never seen such unprofessionalism in peer review; has anyone successfully had a review discarded or flagged for AC intervention when a reviewer uses demonstrably fraudulent citations and resorts to ad hominem attacks?

Note: we got other two as 5 but one is shaking with partially resolved. We are pretty sure I respond each weakness with professional and respectful words in the first rebuttal but in the second, we pointed out the reviewer no relevant references and circular reasoning. He/she seems outrageous… I mean if he/she doesn’t agree we can battle with professionalism but the reviewer is basically living in his / her own mind.