TTABlog Test: Is "USNA" Merely Descriptive of Cosmetics?

The USPTO refused to register the proposed mark KECA’S USNA for “Cosmetics" because the applicant failed to disclaim the word USNA. There was no dispute between the applicant and Examining Attorney Michael FitzSimons that USNA is a Croation word meaning "lips," but there was a dispute as to whether "Croatian is a common, modern language and whether other West Balkan languages in the standardized Serbian-Croatian language family . . . translate 'USNA' as 'lip,' broadening the number of people in the United States that understand USNA as 'lip' in English." Whether consumers would "stop and translate" the term, and whether the term is merely descriptive of the goods were the remaining issues. How do you think this came out? In re Monica Walls, Serial No. 98049431 (June 25 2025) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Cheryl S. Goodman).

The Board first found that Croatian is a modern language, since it is spoken in Croatia and elsewhere. As to whether the language is common, "it is enough to demonstrate that an 'appreciable' number of Americans are capable of translating the term USNA from Croatian into English."

“The doctrine should be applied only when it is likely that the ordinary American purchaser would ‘stop and translate [the word] into its English equivalent.’” For purposes of the doctrine, the “ordinary American purchaser” includes “all American purchasers, including those proficient in a non-English language who would ordinarily be expected to translate words into English."

Given that Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin and Serbian are mutually intelligible among each other and are considered “nearly identical” in vocabulary and grammar, we consider the census and other website information relating to the “Serbo-Croatian” language family probative.

The Board observed that there is no "minimum threshold number of speakers of a foreign language that is required for the language to be considered a “common” one in the United States."

[T]he evidence in the record shows, among other things, there are sizeable global populations of Serbo-Croatian (BCMS) speakers, a significant number of people from Balkan Peninsula countries living in major cities in the United States, evidence that Serbo-Croatian (BCMS) languages are taught by well-known and major U.S. universities, and U.S. census evidence that speakers of the Serbo-Croatian language in the home is over 240,000. Given this evidence, we do not view Croatian as obscure.

The next question was whether the relevant consumer would stop and translate USNA. The Board concluded that USNA has a clear, descriptive meaning in the context of applicant's goods, consumers familiar with the Croatian word USNA likely will focus on that meaning.

The Board noted that under the CAFC's recent VETEMENTS decision, "the burden is on the party opposing translation to show that it is unlikely the ordinary American purchaser would stop and translate the foreign term into its English equivalent."

The Board found that applicant had not met her burden "to show that Croatian is an obscure language or that an American consumer would not stop and translate USNA into its English equivalent, “lip,” in the context of Applicant’s goods."

Finally, the Board found that since applicant's cosmetic products are lipstick or lip gloss, the term "lip" is merely descriptive of applicant's goods.

And so, the Board upheld the disclaimer requirement but gave the applicant thirty days to submit the required disclaimer.

Read comments and post your comment here.

TTABlogger comment: Is this a WYHA?

Text Copyright John L. Welch 2025.