Toft & Toft Limited

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Feb 8, 2018

No. 86914677 (T.T.A.B. Feb. 8, 2018)

This Opinion is not a
Precedent of the TTAB

Mailed: February 8, 2018

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
_____

In re Toft & Toft Limited
_____

Serial No. 86914677
_____

Jon K. Perala of Perala Law Office,
for Toft & Toft Limited
Howard B. Levine, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office 115,
Daniel Brody, Managing Attorney.
_____

Before Taylor, Lykos and Heasley,
Administrative Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Heasley, Administrative Trademark Judge:
Toft & Toft Limited (“Applicant”) seeks registration on the Principal Register of
the mark HANON (in standard characters)1 for goods ultimately identified as
Leather belts; imitation leather belts; umbrellas, parasols;
walking sticks; handbags; sports bags; bags made of
leather; rucksacks; purses; tote bags; shoulder bags;
leather shopping bags; canvas shopping bags; luggage;
holdalls; flight bags; sling bags; backpacks; wallets; credit
card holders in International Class 18;

1 Application Serial No. 86914677 was filed on February 22, 2016 under Section 44(e) of the
Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1126(e), on the basis of United Kingdom Reg. No. 008463838.
Serial No. 86914677
- 2 -
Footwear, namely, shoes and athletic shoes in
International Class 25; and
Retail store services featuring leather and imitation
leather articles, bags, clothing, headgear and footwear with
the exception of those for advertising purposes; online
retail ordering services featuring leather and imitation
leather articles, bags, footwear with the exception of those
for advertising purposes; business management services;
the bringing together for the benefit of others of a variety
of leather and imitation leather articles, bags, footwear
products with the exception of those for advertising
purposes, enabling customers conveniently to view and
purchase those goods in a retail store, from an Internet web
site or by means of telecommunications; business
management and administration in International Class 35.
The Trademark Examining Attorney has refused registration of Applicant’s mark
under Section 2(e)(4), 15 U.S.C. § 1052(e)(4), on the ground that HANON is primarily
merely a surname. Additionally, the Examining Attorney has refused registration
under Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(d), as to all of Applicant’s
goods identified in Class 25 and certain of its services recited in Class 35, namely:
Retail store services featuring . . . clothing, headgear and footwear with
the exception of those for advertising purposes; online retail ordering
services featuring . . . footwear with the exception of those for advertising
purposes; the bringing together for the benefit of others of a variety of . . .
footwear products with the exception of those for advertising purposes,
enabling customers conveniently to view and purchase those goods in a
retail store, from an Internet web site or by means of
telecommunications….

The Examining Attorney contends that Applicant’s mark, as used on or in
connection with these specified goods and services, is likely to cause confusion with
Serial No. 86914677
- 3 -
the previously registered standard character mark RAYA HANON for “clothing,
namely, swimsuits” in International Class 25.2
When the refusals were made final, Applicant appealed and requested
reconsideration. After the Examining Attorney denied the request for
reconsideration, the appeal was resumed. We affirm the refusal to register on the
ground that HANON is primarily merely a surname.
I. Why HANON is Primarily Merely a Surname
Section 2 of the Trademark Act provides, in pertinent part, that “No trademark
by which the goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others
shall be refused registration on the principal register on account of its nature unless
it … (e) Consists of a mark which, … (4) is primarily merely a surname ….” 15 U.S.C.
§ 1052(e)(4) quoted in In re Olin Corp., 124 USPQ2d 1327, 1329 (TTAB 2017). If a
term is “primarily merely a surname,” the statute precludes its registration on the
Principal Register unless there is a showing of acquired distinctiveness under Section
2(f) of the Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1052(f), cited in Azeka Bldg. Corp. v. Azeka, 122 USPQ2d
1477, 1480 (TTAB 2017).3 A term is primarily merely a surname if, as viewed in
relation to the goods or services for which registration is sought, its primary

2 Registration No. 4439245 issued on the Principal Register on November 26, 2013.
3 In the present case, the Examining Attorney twice advised Applicant of its options to seek
registration of its applied-for mark under Section 2(f) or on the Supplemental Register.
Applicant, however, has not claimed acquired distinctiveness under Section 2(f) or sought to
amend its application to the Supplemental Register, so those issues are not before us. See In
re Weiss Watch Co., 123 USPQ2d 1200, 1202 n.2 (TTAB 2017). June 7, 2016 Office Action
TSDR pp. 2-3; Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 6-7. All references to the Trademark
Status and Document Retrieval database, “TSDR,” are to the pdf version.
Serial No. 86914677
- 4 -
significance to the purchasing public is that of a surname. Earnhardt v. Kerry
Earnhardt, Inc., 864 F.3d 1374, 123 USPQ2d 1411, 1413 (Fed. Cir. 2017); In re Beds
& Bars Ltd., 122 USPQ2d 1546, 1548 (TTAB 2017) (citing In re Etablissements Darty
et Fils, 759 F.2d 15, 225 USPQ 652, 653 (Fed. Cir. 1985) and In re Kahan & Weisz
Jewelry Mfg. Corp., 508 F.2d 831, 184 USPQ 421, 422 (CCPA 1975)).
Whether the primary significance of a term is merely that of a surname is a
question of fact that must be resolved on a case-by-case basis, based on the record as
a whole. In re Olin Corp., 124 USPQ2d at 1330; Azeka Bldg. Corp. v. Azeka, 122
USPQ2d at 1480. Among the circumstances that may be probative in making this
determination are: the extent to which the term is exposed to the public as a surname;
whether the term is the surname of anyone connected with the applicant; whether
the term has any recognized meaning other than as a surname; and whether the term
has the structure and pronunciation of a surname. These factors are not exclusive,
nor are they presented in order of importance; any of the factors—singly or in
combination—as well as any other relevant circumstances, may shape the analysis
in a particular case. Id.; In re Integrated Embedded, 120 USPQ2d 1504, 1506 n.4
(TTAB 2016); see In re Benthin Mgmt. GmbH, 37 USPQ2d 1332, 1333-34 (TTAB
1995).
A. The Extent of Public Exposure to HANON as a Surname

We first consider the frequency with which the term HANON is used and exposed
to the public as a surname. See In re Olin Corp., 124 USPQ2d at 1330.
During prosecution, the Examining Attorney submitted evidence of:
Serial No. 86914677
- 5 -
• The WhitePages directory showing 469 matches for the surname Hanon in the
United States;4
• The LEXIS/NEXIS surname database showing Hanon appearing 451 times as
a surname in the United States.5
Applicant argues that numbers in this range demonstrate that a surname is rare,
according to Board precedent. For example, in In re Joint-Stock Co. “Baik”, 84
USPQ2d 1921, 1922 (TTAB 2007), the Board found that “Baik appears to be an
extremely rare surname” based on a database listing of 456 individuals with “Baik”
as a surname.6
However, the Board has recently declared that “[t]his strictly numerical approach
to a surname analysis has been squarely rejected…. ‘[W]ith respect to issues of fact,
no precedential value can be given to the quantum of evidence apparently accepted
in a prior case. The quantum of evidence which was persuasive against finding
surname significance in one case may be insufficient in another because of differences
in the names themselves.’” In re Adlon Brand GmbH & Co., 120 USPQ2d 1717, 1721
(TTAB 2016) (quoting Etablissements Darty, 225 USPQ at 653). Indeed, in the last
few years, the Board has found much rarer surnames than Hanon to be unregistrable
because their primary significance to the public was as a surname. See, e.g., In re
Eximius Coffee, LLC, 120 USPQ2d 1276, 1280 (TTAB 2016) (233 people with surname

4 June 7, 2016 Office Action, WhitePages.com 6/7/2016 TSDR pp. 6-8.
5 Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 6, 50-68.
6 Applicant’s brief p.2, 11 TTABVUE 3.
Serial No. 86914677
- 6 -
ALDECOA); In re Adlon, 120 USPQ2d at 1720 (75 individuals with surname
ADLON); In re Beds & Bars, 122 USPQ2d at 1551 (five people named Belushi).
In the present case, the evidence of record indicates that the surname Hanon,
though possessed by fewer than five hundred people, has enjoyed a measure of
exposure to the general public across the country, thereby raising the probability that
the public at large would regard “Hanon” as a surname, rather than something else.
See In re Gregory, 70 USPQ2d 1792, 1795 (TTAB 2004) (ROGAN primarily merely a
surname based in part on broad exposure of public to politician, athletes, actor and
author with this surname). The WhitePages directory to which the Examining
Attorney alludes shows that the 469 individuals bearing that surname range across
the country, from Brooklyn to Seattle, from Grand Rapids to Colorado Springs.7 The
LEXIS/NEXIS database, to which the Examining Attorney also alludes, shows that
the 451 listed individuals bearing the name also range across the country, from
Baltimore to Cleveland, from San Antonio to San Francisco.8 Those bearing the
Hanon surname include such notables as the writer, director and cinematographer
Jim Hanon, pictured on the Internet Movie Database:

7 June 7, 2016 Office Action, WhitePages.com 6/7/2016 TSDR pp. 6-8.
8 Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 50-68.
Serial No. 86914677
- 7 -
9
Photographer Kate Hanon advertises her photography services on Facebook:
10
The Examining Attorney submitted copies of LinkedIn pages for nine people with
the last name Hanon,11 such as:

9 IMDB.com, July 26, 2017 Office Action TSDR p. 28.
10 July 26, 2017 Office Action TSDR p. 31.
11 July 26, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 20-27.

Serial No. 86914677
- 8 -
12
HANON is also the surname of Charles Louis Hanon, a famous pianist and
educator known for his book of piano exercises, Hanon – The Virtuoso Pianist, in use
since the 1800’s.13 That alone would scarcely demonstrate exposure of the Hanon
name to contemporary audiences, except, as one reviewer noted, “This treatise has
been around forever and is used by pianists the world over, beginners and
professionals alike.”14 The treatise is currently offered for sale on Amazon.com:
15

12 July 26, 2017 Office Action, TSDR p. 13.
13 Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action, TSDR p. 6
14 Amazon.com 1/3/2017, Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR p. 104.
15 Id. at 101.

Serial No. 86914677
- 9 -
The public could also encounter Hanon used as a surname in general-circulation
newspapers. The Examining Attorney adduced seven such newspaper articles,
including “Ike Hanon” mentioned in the New York Times, “Glenn Hanon” mentioned
in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and “Patrick Hanon” mentioned in the St. Louis
Post-Dispatch.16
In this case, the record evidence shows that the surname Hanon is used across the
country, and has received a moderate amount of publicity, such that members of the
general public are likely to encounter it as a surname. For those reasons, the extent
of public exposure of Hanon as a surname supports the Examining Attorney’s case
that its primary significance is as a surname.
B. Whether HANON is the Surname of Anyone Connected with
Applicant

Applicant asseverates that no person in its organization has the “Hanon”
surname.17 The Examining Attorney does not argue otherwise, but maintains that
this is a neutral factor.18 We agree. The absence of a namesake “does not, in itself,
reduce the likelihood that the public would perceive the mark as a surname.” In re
Adlon, 120 USPQ2d at 1724; see also In re Thermo LabSystems Inc., 85 USPQ2d 1285,
1287 (TTAB 2007) (“The fact, however, that ‘a proposed mark is not applicant’s
surname, or the surname of an officer or employee, does not tend to establish one way

16 July 26, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 32-40.
17 Dec. 7, 2016 Response to Office Action TSDR p. 1.
18 Examining Attorney’s brief, 13 TTABVUE 12.
Serial No. 86914677
- 10 -
or the other whether the proposed mark would be perceived as a surname.’”) (quoting
In re Gregory, 70 USPQ2d at 1795. Hence, this factor is neutral.
C. Whether HANON has any Recognized Meaning Other Than as a
Surname
There is evidence showing that HANON has no recognized meaning other than
as a surname. The Examining Attorney has submitted evidence from the American
Heritage Dictionary, the Collins Dictionary, and the Columbia Gazetteer of the World
showing that HANON has no recognized meaning, either as a dictionary definition or
as a place name.19 The evidence that HANON has no other recognized meaning
further supports the Examining Attorney’s case that its primary significance is as a
surname. In re Eximius Coffee, 120 USPQ2d at 1280; In re Olin, 124 USPQ2d at 1332.
D. Whether HANON Has the Structure and Pronunciation of a
Surname

The Examining Attorney maintains that HANON has the structure and
pronunciation of a surname.20 Coupled with the preceding factor―the term’s lack of a
recognized meaning other than as a surname―this factor, if proven, would naturally
tend to predispose the public toward perceiving HANON as a surname. “There are
some names which by their very nature have only a surname significance even though
they are rare surnames. ‘Seidenberg,’ if rare, would be in this class.” In re Rivera
Watch Corp., 106 USPQ 145, 149 (Comm’r Pat. 1955). Assessing whether a term has

19 AHDictionary.com 1/3/2017, 7/26/2017, Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 99-100, July
26, 2017 Office Action TSDR p. 11; CollinsDictionary.com 7/26/2017, July 26, 2017 Office
Action TSDR pp. 6, 18.
20 13 TTABVUE 13-14.
Serial No. 86914677
- 11 -
the structure and pronunciation of a surname may be a decidedly subjective inquiry,
see Miller v. Miller, 105 USPQ2d 1615, 1621 (TTAB 2013), but in this case, the
Examining Attorney has submitted substantial evidence supporting this factor.
HANON, he points out, is the phonetic equivalent of the surname HANNON.
Differing only by the addition of one letter, HANNON consists of the same two-
syllable structure as HANON, and is pronounced the same. HANNON appears no
less than 14,732 times in WhitePages.com,21 demonstrating that the surname is used
frequently. And its exposure to the public is magnified by the fame of certain
Hannons, such as the actor Chris Hannon or the former National Football League
players Tom Hannon and Chris Hannon.22 The public’s familiarity with the surname
HANNON will tend to reinforce its perception that HANON, with its similar
structure and identical pronunciation, is also a surname.
Hence, HANON looks and sounds like a surname. As the Examining Attorney
notes, “the registrant’s mark [RAYA HANON] appears to be a proper name and the
applicant’s mark [HANON] appears to be a surname.”23 Applicant does not rebut this
evidence. Indeed, as it acknowledges, the cited registered mark, RAYA HANON, so
resembled a name that Registrant was required to state that it does not identify a
living individual.24 Based on the record evidence, we find accordingly that HANON
has the structure and pronunciation of a surname.

21 WhitePages.com 1/3/2017, Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp.94-98.
22 Jan. 4, 2017 Office Action TSDR pp. 57-60.
23 Examining Attorney’s brief, 13 TTABVUE 6.
24 Dec. 7, 2016 Response to Office Action TSDR pp. 1, 8.
Serial No. 86914677
- 12 -
All in all, taking the above factors together, we find that even though HANON is
not the surname of anyone connected with Applicant, it has the structure and
pronunciation of a surname, has no other recognized meaning, and has been
extensively exposed to the public at large. For these reasons, we conclude that the
primary significance of HANON to the purchasing public is merely that of a surname
within the meaning of Section 2(e)(4).25
II. Decision
The refusal to register Applicant’s applied-for mark HANON is affirmed as to
all classes on the ground that it is primarily merely a surname.

25 Because we affirm the Examining Attorney’s refusal on this basis, which encompasses all
of the goods and services identified in the Application, we do not reach the refusal to register
under Section 2(d), which concerns only some of those goods and services. See TMBP § 1217;
cf. Multisorb Tech., Inc. v. Pactive Corp., 109 USPQ2d 1170, 1171-72 (TTAB 2013) (citing Am.
Paging Inc. v. Am. Mobilphone Inc., 13 USPQ2d 2036, 2039-40 (TTAB 1989)), aff’d, 923 F.2d
869, 17 USPQ2d 1726 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (non-precedential) cited in Azeka Bldg. Corp. v. Azeka,
122 USPQ2d at 1478.