IP Law Daily, TRADEMARK NEWS: Supreme Court won’t hear case on foreign language terms in trademarks, (Jan 14, 2026)

By Steven Melendez

The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a case involving French clothing brand Vetements, with a name deemed generic after English translation.

The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in a case involving trademark law’s doctrine of foreign equivalents. The French clothing company Vetements Group AG had petitioned the Court to review under what circumstances a non-English term in a mark should be reviewed via its English translation (Vetements Group AG v. Stewart, No. 25-215 (U.S. cert. den. Jan. 12, 2026)).

Background. Vetements Group had sought to register the standard character mark VETEMENTS and a design mark with the same lettering. But the term VETEMENTS is French for clothing, and a trademark examining attorney found the mark was generic under Trademark Act Sections 1, 2, 3, and 45, as well as “highly descriptive” without acquired distinctiveness.

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) agreed with that decision, applying the foreign equivalents doctrine and pointing to the numerous Americans who speak French at home—the minimum who’d be capable of translating the term. Vetements Group appealed to the Federal Circuit, but the court affirmed the denial, finding substantial evidence beyond the Board’s decision, with an “appreciable” number of Americans capable of translating the term into English. The Federal Circuit upheld the ruling that the mark was “generic,” meaning it didn’t reach the question of the Board’s alternative holding that the mark is descriptive without acquired distinctiveness, since generic marks legally can’t acquire distinctiveness.

Foreign equivalents doctrine. The doctrine of foreign equivalents is used to determine if a non-English term is generic or descriptive by translating it into English, then assessing the translation’s descriptiveness or generic nature. Translations are also used to assess a mark for geographic descriptiveness and likelihood of confusion with other marks.

One question considered by courts is whether an ordinary consumer would make the translation. The Federal Circuit declined to specify a precise standard for considering the ordinary purchaser’s foreign language skills but held in this case that it’s enough that an “appreciable” number of Americans could translate the term VETEMENTS. French is one of the more common languages spoken in the United States. At least 1.5 million people speaking it at home, and it’s also the second most common language spoken in school, according to the Federal Circuit’s ruling.

Challenge to Federal Circuit ruling. Vetements Group argued that though the Federal Circuit had described the doctrine of foreign equivalents as a guideline rather than an absolute rule, it was in practice generally applied to modern languages, making whether a foreign term is registrable is in practice governed by its English translation rather than how it’s actually perceived by consumers.

The company argued that conflicts with Supreme Court precedent that held the non-English mark “La Favorita” was not a literal indicator of quality but instead a fancy, foreign name distinguishable from “a mere English word denoting quality” and thus valid to register. Vetements Group argued that the Federal Circuit didn’t provide a reason for distinguishing that precedent and that U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal are split on the question of how to apply the doctrine of foreign equivalents.

Vetements had argued that the case was a good vehicle to resolve the question, since it dealt with a single foreign-language term, VETEMENTS. The case also presented the question in the context of genericness, descriptiveness, and likelihood of confusion, and didn’t deal with issues beyond the single term, the company had argued.

The petition had presented two questions: (1) Whether protection of a non-English mark is controlled by consumer perception of the mark taken at face value or controlled by its English translation; and (2) What is the proper test for determining genericness or descriptiveness of a non-English mark?

News: Trademark FedCirNews USPTO