Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62016TN0817

Case T-817/16: Action brought on 21 November 2016 — Vans v EUIPO — Deichmann (V)

OJ C 22, 23.1.2017, p. 49–50 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

23.1.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/49

Action brought on 21 November 2016 — Vans v EUIPO — Deichmann (V)

(Case T-817/16)

(2017/C 022/67)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Vans, Inc. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: M. Hirsch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Deichmann SE (Essen, Germany)

Details of the procedure before EUIPO

Party applying for the mark: Applicant

Mark at issue: EU figurative mark (Representation of a ‘V’) — Application No 10 263 978

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 September 2016 in Case R 2030/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

amend the contested decision by rejecting the opposition in its entirety;

—

in the alternative, amend the contested decision by declaring that the opposition is also rejected for the goods ‘Goods made of leather or imitations of leather; trunks and travelling bags; umbrellas; parasols and walking sticks; wallets; bags and pouches; rucksacks; belt bags; briefcases; school satchels; school satchels for sport; beach bags; keyrings; hip bags; card cases’ in Class 18 and ‘Clothing, footwear, headgear; belts; gloves’ in Class 25;

—

in the further alternative, annul the contested decision;

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law

—

infringement of Rule 19(2) and (3) and Rule 20(1) of Regulation No 2868/95;

—

infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

—

infringement of the first sentence of Article 60, Article 63(2) and the first sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 and of the principle of reformatio in peius as well as of the right to be heard.
Top