To properly examine applications with non-English wording or non-Latin characters in the mark, the translation of the non-English wording or transliteration of the non-Latin characters must be determined prior to performing a search of the mark. See In re Advanced New Techs. Co., Ser. No. 86832288, 2023 TTAB LEXIS 2, at *19 (2023). This is critical because the foreign equivalent of an English term may be regarded in the same way as the English term, such as for purposes of determining descriptiveness, requiring a disclaimer, and citing marks under Trademark Act §2(d). See id.

Therefore, if there is no translation of non-English wording in the mark in the initial application, the examining attorney should ascertain the meaning of the non-English wording before searching the mark. Similarly, if there is no transliteration of non-Latin characters in the mark in the initial application, the examining attorney should ascertain the transliteration of the non-Latin characters and the meaning of the transliterated wording before searching the mark.

The examining attorney may obtain the meaning of non-English wording, and/or determine the transliteration of non-Latin characters and the meaning of the transliterated wording, using various sources such as foreign language dictionaries, research databases, and third-party websites. See In re Advanced New Techs. Co., 2023 TTAB LEXIS 2, at *20. The examining attorney may also consult the Trademark Law Librarian or the Translations Branch, as appropriate.

If research by the examining attorney, the Trademark Law Library, and/or the Translations Branch indicates that the term has no meaning or no clear and exact equivalent in a foreign language, although no inquiry regarding the meaning in a foreign language appears necessary, the examining attorney still has the discretion under 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b) to make such an inquiry. If no inquiry is made, the examining attorney must enter a Note to the File (also referred to as a Public Note or Notation to File) in the record indicating that the term was checked for a translation. In such cases, a statement regarding meaning must not be entered for publishing in the Trademark Official Gazette. See TMEP §809.01(a) regarding when an inquiry is made.

If the examining attorney determines the meaning of the non-English wording and/or the transliteration of the non-Latin characters, the examining attorney must search the wording as it appears in the application, the transliterated wording, and the English translation for the wording, as applicable. The examining attorney must also require that an accurate translation and/or transliteration be made of record by the applicant using the researched translation and/or transliteration or other accurate translation and/or transliteration provided by applicant. See 37 C.F.R. §§2.32(a)(9)–(10), 2.44(a)(1), 2.45(a)(1), 2.61(b). If the applicant disputes a translation and/or transliteration obtained through online resources, the examining attorney should supplement the record with evidence from the Trademark Law Librarian and/or the Translations Branch.

If the translation and/or transliteration is provided or supplemented after the examining attorney has conducted a search for conflicting marks, the examining attorney must conduct a new search of any new or supplemented transliterated wording and/or English translation, as applicable.

If it is necessary to make a separate inquiry regarding the meaning of non-English wording, the examining attorney should provide the applicant with the correct format for a translation or transliteration statement. See TMEP §809.03. If a general inquiry is made regarding meaning under 37 C.F.R. §2.61(b) (i.e., whether the term has significance in the relevant trade, any geographical significance, or any meaning in a foreign language), the applicant’s response may not be in the correct format for the translation or transliteration statement. When an applicant’s response to an inquiry regarding the meaning of non-English wording includes statements that are not related to the translation or transliteration of such wording, the examining attorney must ensure that only statements regarding the translation or transliteration are entered in the relevant Trademark database using the appropriate format for inclusion on any registration certificate that may issue. See TMEP §809.03.

Similarly, if the applicant responds to an inquiry regarding non-English wording that "the mark has only trademark significance," "the mark is a coined term," or in some similar manner, the examining attorney must not enter the statement in that format in the Trademark database. Instead, the examining attorney must ensure that the statement is reformatted appropriately to reflect that the wording has no meaning in a foreign language, and entered in the relevant Trademark database. See TMEP §809.03. It is not necessary to issue an examiner’s amendment in such cases.

There are three limited exceptions to the general rule requiring that all foreign wording be translated. See TMEP §§809.01(b)(i)–809.01(b)(iii).

It is generally unnecessary to provide a translation of a foreign term if the term appears in an English dictionary (e.g., croissant, fiesta or flambé). However, if a term that appears in the English dictionary appears in a mark as part of a foreign idiomatic phrase or other unitary expression, a translation of the idiomatic phrase or unitary expression is required. The translation must not break the phrase into its individual word elements or translate only the individual words that do not appear in the English dictionary. Such a translation would serve no useful purpose because it would not convey the true commercial impression of the phrase.

Example: If the mark included the phrase "la fiesta grande," an appropriate translation would be "the great celebration" or possibly "the great fiesta." It would be inappropriate to translate only the individual foreign elements "la" and "grande." The ultimate goal is to provide a translation that reflects the true meaning of the non-English wording in the mark and the commercial impression made by the entire phrase. See TMEP §809.02 regarding equivalency in translation.

It is generally unnecessary to provide a translation of foreign articles or prepositions, such as "de," "le," "la," or "il," when combined with English terms, because their meaning is generally understood and, in this context, they are being used to convey an impression different from their foreign meaning. For example, in the mark "LE CASE," it is unnecessary to translate "LE."

It is generally not necessary to translate wording from dead languages. Cf. In re Spirits Int’l, N.V., 563 F.3d 1347, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (quoting 1 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks & Unfair Competition §11:34 (5th ed. 2023 & Supp. 2025)). A dead language is "[a] language, such as Latin, that is no longer learned as a native language by a speech community." https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=dead+language (accessed March 9, 2026).

Similarly, it is generally not necessary to translate wording from languages that are obscure. Cf. In re Spirits Int’l, N.V., 563 F.3d at 1351; In re Spirits of New Merced, LLC, Ser. No. 78710805, 2007 TTAB LEXIS 93, at *9-10 (2007) (in considering whether "Yosemite" was primarily geographically descriptive, the Board found no evidence that the general public would be familiar with the derivation of "Yosemite" as meaning "those who kill" or "the killers" in the Native American Miwok tribal language, or "that this meaning would be anything but obscure to them"); In re Fiore, LLC, Ser. No. 76445173, 2005 TTAB LEXIS 296, at *18 (2005) (acknowledging Old English was an obscure language); Gen. Cigar Co. v. G.D.M. Inc., 988 F. Supp. 647, 660-61 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (finding applicant had no obligation to disclose that the term COHIBA for cigars means "tobacco" in the language of the Taino Indians in the Dominican Republic, because cigar smokers in the United States would not be aware of such a meaning).

However, the determination of whether a language is dead or obscure must be made on a case-by-case basis, based on the meaning that the term would have to the relevant purchasing public.

Example: Latin is generally considered a dead language. However, if there is evidence that a Latin term is still in use by the relevant purchasing public (e.g., if the term appears in news articles), then that Latin term is not considered dead. The same analysis should be applied to obscure languages.

See TMEP §1207.01(b)(vi) regarding the applicability of the doctrine of foreign equivalents to wording from dead or obscure languages.