I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
(2017/C 022/67)
Language in which the application was lodged: German
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)
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
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.
—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.