CELEX: 62017TN0672
Language: en
Date: 2017-09-25 00:00:00
Title: Case T-672/17: Action brought on 25 September 2017 — Mamas and Papas v EUIPO — Wall-Budden (Cot bumpers)

27.11.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 402/50
            
         Action brought on 25 September 2017 — Mamas and Papas v EUIPO — Wall-Budden (Cot bumpers)
   (Case T-672/17)
   (2017/C 402/66)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Mamas and Papas Ltd (Huddersfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Reid, Barrister and B. Whitehead, Solicitor)
   
      Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Jane Wall-Budden (Byfleet, United Kingdom)
   
      Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
   
   
      Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Design at issue: Community design of cot bumpers — Community design No 1230460-0001
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 July 2017 in Case R 208/2016-3
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               declare Community Registered Design No 1230460-0001 invalid;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the design holder to bear the costs and fees of the applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 6/2002;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Articles 3 and 4 of Regulation No 6/2002;
            
         
               —
            
            
               The Board of Appeal failed to give less weight to features not visible in use;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002.