Businesses seeking US trademark protection for foreign-language terms should be aware of the doctrine of foreign equivalents, which may result in refusal of registration if the English translation is deemed generic, descriptive, or confusingly similar to an existing mark.
Recent decisions from the US Trademark Office and federal courts underscore the importance of understanding how foreign-language trademarks are evaluated under US law. The doctrine of foreign equivalents allows examiners to translate non-English words in a proposed mark to assess whether the English meaning affects registrability.
What Is the Doctrine of Foreign Equivalents?
Under this doctrine, a foreign term in a trademark application may be translated into English to determine whether it is:
- Generic (e.g., common name for the goods),
- Merely descriptive, or
- Confusingly similar to an existing registered mark.
This analysis turns on whether the "ordinary American purchaser" would likely translate the term into English. However, the definition of this consumer group remains fluid and context-dependent.
Recent Examples of Refusals
Several recent cases illustrate how this doctrine is applied:
- VETEMENTS (French for "clothing") was deemed generic for apparel. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) and the Federal Circuit upheld the refusal, citing the prevalence of French in the US and the applicant's failure to prove that consumers would not translate the term.
- SAPORITO (Italian for "tasty") was found merely descriptive for dry sausage products.
- GUEPARDO (Spanish for "cheetah") was refused due to likelihood of confusion with an existing registration for CHEETAH, both used in connection with vehicle-related goods.
These cases demonstrate that even non-English terms can be refused if their English equivalents conflict with trademark rules.
Federal Circuit Affirms Vetements Refusal
In a notable 2025 decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB's refusal to register VETEMENTS, emphasizing that French is widely understood in the US and that the applicant did not meet the burden of showing that consumers would not translate the term. The applicant has since petitioned the US Supreme Court for review, seeking clarity on the evidentiary standard required to overcome the doctrine.
Practical Guidance for Trademark Applicants
Until further guidance is provided, applicants should take proactive steps to avoid refusals based on foreign equivalents:
- Conduct translation checks for all non-English terms in proposed marks.
- Assess consumer familiarity with the language in question.
- Evaluate potential conflicts with existing English-language trademarks.
This is especially critical for international brands entering the US market, where a refusal could hinder expansion and brand protection.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
