Holding that the issue presented by a composite mark consisting of personal names is "what the purchasing public would think when confronted with the mark as a whole"
In University of Notre Dame Du Lac v. J.C. Gourmet Food Imports Co., 703 F.2d 1372, 1376, 217 USPQ 505, 509 (Fed. Cir. 1983), the court added that section 2(a) embraces concepts of the right to privacy which may be violated even in the absence of likelihood of confusion.
In Darty et Fils, however, even though, the primary question was whether "Darty" was primarily merely a surname, the Board had correctly held that the Opposers’ "provides no support for their contention."