Your Last Name Isn’t Automatically Yours to Trademark
Most founders I talk to named the business after themselves. It's the obvious move. You are the brand, your name is already on the LLC, the domain was available, and it felt like the safest possible choice. Nobody else is you.
Then the USPTO sends back a refusal, and the letter says the mark is "primarily merely a surname."
That happened again last week. On September 22, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board affirmed a refusal to register HANSEN HONEY FARM for honey. The applicant is a real honey business. Hansen is the president's last name. The Board still said no.
If your business name is your last name plus a word or two about what you sell, this one is worth your time.
What the rule actually says
Section 2(e)(4) of the Trademark Act blocks registration of a mark that is primarily merely a surname. The reasoning isn't that surnames are unimportant. It's the opposite. Last names are shared. Thousands of people are named Hansen, and every one of them is entitled to use their own name in business. So the law makes you clear a higher bar before you can claim exclusive federal rights in one.
In the Hansen case, the record showed HANSEN appearing 286,420 times in a surname database. The applicant didn't argue that Hansen means anything other than a last name, and didn't argue that it fails to look and sound like one. That was most of the fight, right there.
The part that catches people off guard
Here's what founders usually assume: add a descriptive word and the problem goes away. Hansen is a surname, sure, but HANSEN HONEY FARM is a whole phrase. It has to count for something.
It usually doesn't. The Board found HONEY FARM to be descriptive of, or generic for, the goods, and put it plainly: nondistinctive terms typically are accorded less weight and are not likely to detract from the primary surname significance of the mark. The Board also pointed out that it's very common for businesses to use the last names of their owners along with the descriptive phrase honey farm in their names. Adding a word everyone in your industry already uses doesn't make your name distinctive. It just tells the public what you sell, right next to your last name.
Swap in your own facts. Crawford Consulting. Ramirez Coaching. Patel Skincare. Okonkwo Studio. Every one of those is a surname next to a word describing the work, and every one raises the same issue.
"But other people got theirs registered"
The Hansen applicant made that argument, and pointed to registrations for LOCKHART HONEY FARMS, BEDILLION HONEY FARM, WEEKS HONEY FARM and GEORGIA HONEY FARM. It's a reasonable instinct. If those are sitting on the register, why not this one?
It didn't carry the day. Applications are examined on their own records, and what another applicant filed, argued or proved years ago doesn't decide your case. This is one of the more expensive misunderstandings in trademark work. Founders search the register, find something similar already registered, and read it as permission. A registration you can see doesn't tell you what it took to get it, whether it was refused first, or what the owner gave up along the way.
One more thing worth knowing: the Hansen decision wasn't designated precedential. It isn't new law. It's a clean, current illustration of law that has been on the books a long time, which is exactly why it's worth your attention. This is the ordinary outcome, not a surprise ruling.
What you can actually do about it
A surname refusal isn't the end of the road. It changes your options.
Add something genuinely distinctive. Not a word that describes your product or service. Something invented, or suggestive rather than descriptive, that does real work in the name.
Register a design. A logo containing your name can be registrable on the strength of its distinctive design elements. Just understand what you're protecting, which is the design and not the words.
Use the Supplemental Register. Surname marks are eligible. You get less than a full registration, and you still get real benefits: you can use the registered symbol, your mark turns up when the USPTO searches later applications, and it's a foothold while you build.
Build acquired distinctiveness. If your name has come to identify your business in the public's mind rather than just a family, it can be registered on that basis. Five years of substantially exclusive and continuous use is the usual starting point, and it takes evidence, not just time.
Or pick a separate brand name. Plenty of founders keep their own name as the company's trade name and build a distinctive brand name for the thing they actually sell and scale. Both can be true at once.
What a refusal does not mean
You're not being told to stop using your name. A 2(e)(4) refusal is about federal registration, not about whether you can operate. Your business keeps running under the name it has.
What you lose is what registration gives you: a presumption of ownership nationwide, a public record that makes other people back off before a dispute starts, and a much easier path to enforcement when someone copies you. Those are worth planning for on purpose.
The practical takeaway
If your business name is your last name, it's worth finding out where you stand before you file. A clearance search plus a written opinion tells you whether you're looking at a surname question, a descriptiveness question, a conflict with someone else's mark, or a clear path. It also tells you which of the options above fits your situation, which depends on how long you've been using the name, how well known it is, and what you're planning to build.
USPTO filing fees aren't refundable, so a refusal costs you the fee and the months you spent waiting for it. That's the part worth getting ahead of.
If you're naming something right now, or you already filed and got a refusal you don't understand, book a free 15-minute call: https://calendly.com/citruslegal/discovery-call. It isn't a legal advice call. It's a short conversation about what you're building and whether a search makes sense as a next step.
More on how the search and opinion process works
Common questions about registration, refusals and timing
Sources
In re Hansen Honey Farm, Serial No. 98224899 (TTAB Sept. 22, 2026), summarized at The TTABlog: thettablog.blogspot.com/2026/09/ttablog-test-is-hansen-honey-farm-for.html
This article is general information, not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.