The doctrine of foreign equivalents is used "to ascertain if a non-English word mark is impermissibly generic or descriptive by translating the mark into English and then considering its genericness or descriptiveness." In re Vetements Grp. AG, 137 F.4th 1317, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2025) (citing In re N. Paper Mills, 64 F.2d 998, 998-99 (C.C.P.A. 1933)).

The foreign equivalent of merely descriptive or generic English wording is no more registrable than the English wording itself. See In re Vetements Grp. AG, 137 F.4th at 1322-23. "[A] word taken from a well-known foreign modern language, which is, itself, descriptive [or generic] of a product, will be so considered when it is attempted to be registered as a trade-mark in the United States for the same product." Id. at 1322 (quoting In re N. Paper Mills, 64 F.2d at 998) (holding VETEMENTS, a French word meaning "clothing," generic for applicant’s clothing goods and online retail clothing store services); see In re Highlights for Children, Inc., Ser. No. 85838981, 2016 TTAB LEXIS 104 (2016) (holding IMÁGENES ESCONDIDAS, Spanish wording meaning "hidden pictures," merely descriptive for books and magazines for children); In re Sadoru Grp., Ltd., Ser. No. 77941164, 2012 TTAB LEXIS 325 (2012) (holding SADORU in stylized form, a Japanese word meaning "saddle," merely descriptive for motorcycle seats and pads); In re Tokutake Indus. Co., Ser. No. 79018656, 2008 TTAB LEXIS 26 (2008) (holding AYUMI and its Japanese-character equivalent merely descriptive for footwear where the evidence, including applicant's own admissions, indicated that the primary meaning of applicant's mark is "walking"); In re Oriental Daily News, Inc., Ser. No. 73403423, 1986 TTAB LEXIS 68 (1986) (holding the Chinese characters that mean ORIENTAL DAILY NEWS merely descriptive of the general focus of the content or subject matter of applicant’s newspapers); In re Geo. A. Hormel & Co., Ser. No. 73410552, 1985 TTAB LEXIS 45 (1985) (holding SAPORITO, an Italian word meaning "tasty," merely descriptive because it describes a desirable characteristic of applicant’s dry sausage).

The doctrine is a guideline, not an absolute rule. In re Vetements Grp. AG, 137 F.4th at 1325 (quoting Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee en 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2005)). The doctrine should be applied unless it is unlikely that the ordinary American purchaser would stop and translate the non-English wording into its English equivalent. Id. at 1323-24. See TMEP §1207.01(b)(vi) for the doctrine of foreign equivalents and for the factors for determining whether an ordinary American purchaser will stop and translate foreign wording.

Note that marks comprised of a term from a foreign language used with an English term may be found registrable if the commercial impression created by the combination differs from that which would be created by two English words. See In re Taverna Izakaya LLC, 2021 TTAB LEXIS 427, at *14-15 (holding TAVERNA COSTERA for restaurant, café, and bar services not merely descriptive and registrable on the Principal Register with a disclaimer of the English word TAVERNA); In re Johanna Farms Inc., Ser. No. 73542343, 1988 TTAB LEXIS 31 (1988) (holding LA YOGURT for yogurt registrable on the Principal Register with a disclaimer of the English word YOGURT); In re Sweet Victory, Inc., Ser. No. 73484117, 1986 TTAB LEXIS 146 (1986) (holding GLACÉ LITE not merely descriptive for ice creams, sherbets, frozen yogurts, and nondairy frozen desserts because the combination of the French word GLACÉ with the English word LITE makes the expression somewhat incongruous); In re Universal Package Corp., Ser. No. 73331419, 1984 TTAB LEXIS 136 (1984) (holding LE CASE not merely descriptive of jewelry boxes and gift boxes and registrable on the Principal Register with a disclaimer of the English word CASE).

See TMEP §§809-809.03 for information regarding how to determine the meaning of non-English wording in a mark. For information regarding the doctrine of foreign equivalents in other contexts, see TMEP §§1207.01(b)(vi)(A)-(b)(vi)(B) for likelihood of confusion, §1210.05(b) for geographical deceptiveness, §1210.10 for geographic significance, and §1211.01(a)(vii) for surnames.