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

(Case T-817/16)

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.

____________