United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

IN RE: VETEMENTS GROUP AG, Appellant ______________________

2023-2050, 2023-2051 ______________________

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. 88/944,198, 88/946,135. ______________________

Decided: May 21, 2025 ______________________

TERENCE J. LINN, Gardner, Linn, Burkhart & Ondersma LLP, Grand Rapids, MI, argued for appellant. Also represented by CATHERINE S. COLLINS, KARL T. ONDERSMA.

ERICA JEUNG DICKEY, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, ar- gued for appellee Coke Morgan Stewart. Also represented by CHRISTINA J. HIEBER, AMY J. NELSON. ______________________

Before PROST, WALLACH, and CHEN, Circuit Judges. WALLACH, Circuit Judge. Case: 23-2050 Document: 55 Page: 2 Filed: 05/21/2025

2 IN RE: VETEMENTS GROUP AG

Vêtement is the French word for clothing in English.1 Appellant Vetements Group AG (“Appellant”) appeals the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”), which affirmed the Examining Attorney’s refusal to regis- ter the proposed marks: VETEMENTS in standard charac- ters and in stylized form. 2 The Board concluded after applying the foreign equivalents doctrine that the marks were generic and merely descriptive without acquired dis- tinctiveness under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1). The Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with law, so this Court affirms. BACKGROUND In June 2020, Appellant filed applications for registra- tion on the Principal Register of two marks: VETEMENTS, in standard characters, and , in stylized form (capital block lettering in customized font), in connection with “[s]hirts, skirts, sweaters, coats, jackets, suits, caps, headwear, hats, hoods, visors, scarves, gloves, shoes, boots, waist belts, t-shirts, pants, blouses, dresses” in

1 It is undisputed that the English translation of “VETEMENTS” in the mark is “CLOTHING.” Oral Arg. at 10:07–10:21, 13:34–41 (available at https://oralargu- ments.cafc.uscourts.gov/default.aspx?fl=23-2050_0207202 5.mp3). 2 The Board’s Opinion affirming the rejection of Ap- pellant’s marks is in the record at Appx1–45, and is avail- able at In re Vetements Group AG, Nos. 88944198, 88946135, 2023 WL 3271156 (T.T.A.B. Apr. 21, 2023). Case: 23-2050 Document: 55 Page: 3 Filed: 05/21/2025

IN RE: VETEMENTS GROUP AG 3

International Class 25 and “[o]nline retail store services for” the same in International Class 35. 3 Appx51–58; Appx478–84. The Examining Attorney refused the applications in Fi- nal Office Actions in December 2021, on the ground that the marks as applied to clothing and online retail store ser- vices for clothing were generic, or in the alternative, merely descriptive without acquired distinctiveness, and were barred from registration under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(1). Ap- pellant filed an appeal to the Board. The Board affirmed the genericness and “alternative mere descriptiveness refusals” as well as the Examining Attorney’s finding that Appellant failed to establish ac- quired distinctiveness. Appx1–3. In reaching its conclu- sion, the Board applied the doctrine of foreign equivalents. The Board found that, as of 2010, French is the fifth-most spoken non-English language at home, and it is the second most widely taught non-English language in schools in the United States. The Board reasoned that VETEMENTS is subject to the doctrin