UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (USPTO)
`
`OFFICE ACTION (OFFICIAL LETTER) ABOUT APPLICANT’S TRADEMARK APPLICATION
`
`U.S. APPLICATION
`SERIAL NO. 79168327
`
`           
`
`MARK: BULL'S HEADS
`
`CORRESPONDENT
`ADDRESS:
`      
`HOWARD J. SHIRE,
`ESQ.
`      
`ANDREWS KURTH
`KENYON LLLP
`      
`ONE BROADWAY
`      
`NEW YORK, NY
`10004
`      
`APPLICANT: Intersnack
`Group GmbH & Co. KG
`
`    
`
`*79168327*
`
`GENERAL TRADEMARK
`INFORMATION:
`http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp
`
`    
`
`CORRESPONDENT’S
`REFERENCE/DOCKET
`
`   
`
`NO:       
`
`  N/A     
`CORRESPONDENT
`
`E-MAIL ADDRESS:       
`
`REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED
`
`ISSUE/MAILING DATE:
`INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION NO. 1224801
`
`The trademark examining attorney has carefully reviewed applicant’s request for reconsideration and is denying the request for the reasons
`stated below.  See 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(3); TMEP §§715.03(a)(ii)(B), 715.04(a).  The following refusal made final in the Office action dated May
`24, 2017 is maintained and continue to be final:  the Section 2(d) likelihood of confusion refusal with respect to U.S. Registration Nos.
`4086641, 4263438 and 4278185.  See TMEP §§715.03(a)(ii)(B), 715.04(a).  The following requirement made final in the Office action is
`satisfied:  an acceptable identification of goods.  See TMEP §§715.03(a)(ii)(B), 715.04(a).
`
`It is noted that the refusal to register has only been appealed as to International Classes 30 and 31.  Since the final refusal pertained to all classes
`and International Class 29 has not been appealed, and there is no time remaining in the response period, International Class 29 is hereby
`abandoned.
`
`In the present case, applicant’s request has not resolved all the outstanding issue(s), nor does it raise a new issue or provide any new or
`compelling evidence with regard to the outstanding issue(s) in the final Office action.  In addition, applicant’s analysis and arguments are not
`persuasive nor do they shed new light on the issues.  Specifically, the examining attorney remains of the opinion that the marks are highly similar
`in that the proposed mark is the English equivalent of the cited Chinese characters marks which all translate as “BULL’S HEAD”.   Under the
`doctrine of foreign equivalents, a mark in a common, modern foreign language and a mark that is its English equivalent may be held confusingly
`similar.  TMEP §1207.01(b)(vi); see, e.g., In re Aquamar, Inc., 115 USPQ2d 1122, 1127-28 (TTAB 2015); In re Thomas, 79 USPQ2d 1021,
`1025 (TTAB 2006).  Consequently, marks comprised of foreign wording are translated into English to determine similarity in meaning and
`connotation with English word marks.  See Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin Maison Fondee en 1772, 396 F.3d 1369, 1377, 73
`USPQ2d 1689, 1696 (Fed. Cir. 2005).  Equivalence in meaning and connotation may be sufficient to find such marks confusingly similar.  See In
`re Aquamar, Inc., 115 USPQ2d at 1127-28; In re Thomas, 79 USPQ2d at 1025.
`
`The registrant’s marks are in Chinese, which is a common, modern language in the United States.   See In re Oriental Daily News, Ltd., 230
`USPQ 637 (TTAB 1986) (Chinese).  Applicant has argued that only a low percentage of the American population speaks Chinese and has
`attached Internet evidence.  However, as previously stated, to make Internet materials part of the record, an applicant must provide (1) an image
`file or printout of the actual downloaded webpage, and (2) complete information as to the date the evidence was published or accessed from the
`Internet, and its source (e.g., the complete URL address of the website).  See TMEP §710.01(b) (citing Safer Inc. v. OMS Invs. Inc., 94 USPQ2d
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`at 1039).  Here, applicant’s submitted materials cannot be made of record because the pages are incomplete and applicant has not provided
`complete information as to the date the evidence was published or accessed from the Internet, and its source (e.g., the complete URL address of
`
`the website).  
`
`Moreover, the attached evidence from the Census Bureau shows the large number of U.S. consumers who speak this language, with Chinese
`being the third most popular language in the United States.   In addition, the attached Internet evidence shows that Chinese is spoken by a sizeable
`world population and is actually ranked #1 as the top language spoken in the world based on the approximate number of speakers.
`
`The doctrine is applied when “the ordinary American purchaser” would “stop and translate” the foreign term into its English equivalent.  Palm
`Bay, 396 F.3d at 1377, 73 USPQ2d at 1696 (quoting In re Pan Tex Hotel Corp., 190 USPQ 109, 110 (TTAB 1976)); TMEP §1207.01(b)(vi)(A). 
`The ordinary American purchaser includes those proficient in the foreign language.  In re Spirits Int’l, N.V., 563 F.3d 1347, 1352, 90 USPQ2d
`1489, 1492 (Fed. Cir. 2009); see In re Thomas, 79 USPQ2d at 1024.  Thus, the ordinary American purchaser is not limited to merely English
`speaking purchasers.   Moreover, the doctrine also applies to Asian character marks. See In re Tokutake Indus. Co., 87 USPQ2d 1697 (TTAB
`2008) (Japanese); In re Oriental Daily News, Ltd., 230 USPQ 637 (TTAB 1986) (Chinese).
`
`In this case, the ordinary American purchaser would likely stop and translate the mark because the Chinese language is a common, modern
`language spoken by an appreciable number of consumers in the United States.
`
`Applicant has argued that the Chinese characters and the design elements are the dominant features in the cited marks.  The examining attorney
`agrees that the Chinese characters are the dominant feature and since the Chinese characters mean BULL’S HEAD, the marks would be
`confusingly similar to applicant’s proposed BULL’S HEADS mark.
`
`With respect to the design elements, when evaluating a composite mark containing both words and designs, the word portion is more likely to
`indicate the origin of the goods and/or services because it is that portion of the mark that consumers use when referring to or requesting the
`goods and/or services.  Bond v. Taylor, 119 USPQ2d 1049, 1055 (TTAB 2016) (citing In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d 1358, 1362, 101 USPQ2d
`1905, 1908, 1911 (Fed. Cir. 2012)); TMEP §1207.01(c)(ii).  Thus, although marks must be compared in their entireties, the word portion is often
`considered the dominant feature and is accorded greater weight in determining whether marks are confusingly similar, even where the word
`portion has been disclaimed.  In re Viterra Inc., 671 F.3d at 1366-67, 101 USPQ2d at 1911 (citing Giant Food, Inc. v. Nation’s Foodservice,
`Inc., 710 F.2d 1565, 1570-71, 218 USPQ2d 390, 395 (Fed. Cir. 1983)).  Further, the design of a bull’s head in the cited marks merely reinforces
`the literal BULL’S HEAD element which comprises the entirety of applicant’s proposed mark.
`
`In this case, applicant’s mark does not create a distinct commercial impression because it contains no other wording, stylization or design
`element to distinguish it from the registered marks.
`
`The examining attorney notes that applicant has not made any arguments pertaining to the relatedness of the goods.  Nonetheless, the examining
`attorney maintains that the parties offer identical and closely related food products.  Please see attached additional Internet evidence which
`consists of excerpts from food retailers’ websites offering the applicant’s and registrant’s various food items for sale.  The attached and
`previously attached Internet evidence establishes that the same entity commonly provides the relevant goods and markets the goods under the
`same mark, the relevant goods are sold or provided through the same trade channels and used by the same classes of consumers in the same
`fields of use and the goods are similar or complementary in terms of purpose or function.  Thus, applicant’s and registrant’s goods are
`considered related for likelihood of confusion purposes.  See, e.g., In re Davey Prods. Pty Ltd., 92 USPQ2d 1198, 1202-04 (TTAB 2009); In re
`Toshiba Med. Sys. Corp., 91 USPQ2d 1266, 1268-69, 1271-72 (TTAB 2009).
`
`Also attached are additional copies of third-party marks registered for use in connection with the same or similar goods as those of the applicant
`and registrant in this case.  This evidence further demonstrates that the parties' goods are of a kind that may emanate from a single source under
`a single mark.  See In re Aquamar, Inc., 115 USPQ2d 1122, 1126 n.5 (TTAB 2015) (citing In re Mucky Duck Mustard Co., 6 USPQ2d 1467,
`1470 n.6 (TTAB 1988)); In re Albert Trostel & Sons Co., 29 USPQ2d 1783, 1785-86 (TTAB 1993); TMEP §1207.01(d)(iii).
`
`Therefore, because the marks are confusingly similar and the goods are identical and closely related, consumers encountering these goods are
`likely to mistakenly believe that they are provided by a common source.  Accordingly, the request for reconsideration is denied and the final
`refusal to register pursuant to Section 2(d) of the Trademark Act is maintained and continued.
`
`If applicant has already filed a timely notice of appeal with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the Board will be notified to resume the
`appeal.  See TMEP §715.04(a).
`
`If no appeal has been filed and time remains in the six-month response period to the final Office action, applicant has the remainder of the
`response period to (1) comply with and/or overcome any outstanding final requirement(s) and/or refusal(s), and/or (2) file a notice of appeal to
`the Board.  TMEP §715.03(a)(ii)(B); see 37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(1)-(3).  The filing of a request for reconsideration does not stay or extend the time
`
`for filing an appeal.  37 C.F.R. §2.63(b)(3); see TMEP §§715.03, 715.03(a)(ii)(B), (c).   
`
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
` 
`

`

`/Hai-Ly Lam/
`Hai-Ly Lam
`Trademark Examining Attorney
`Law Office 112
`Telephone: (571) 272-3354
`Email: hai.lam@uspto.gov
`
` 
`   
`

`

`Print: Dec 22, 2017
`
`85228977
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`85228977
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Registration Number
`4086641
`
`Date Registered
`2012/01/17
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`( 2) DESIGN ONLY
`
`OWner
`HAW-DI-I FOODS CO. LTD. CORPORATION TAIWAN Daying Village, Sinshih
`Township No. 160, Fongrong Tainan County TAIWAN
`
`Goods/Services
`IC 029. US 046. G & S: animal milk; milk
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`powder; milk, butter; rice milk; soybean milk; tofu puddings; animal
`and vegetable oil for cooking; fruit jellies; mesona jellies; jelly
`fig jellies; tortoise herb jellies; pork floss; meat paste; meat
`broth; meat soup; minced pork paste; instant condensed broth; chicken
`stock; block broth; stock powder; fish balls; fried fish floss; fish
`soup; dried bonitos; minced fish products; instant seafood soup;
`frozen instant pre-cooked stews and soups; canned sweet kernel corn;
`frozen fruits and vegetables; dried fruits and vegetables; dehydrated
`fruits and vegetables; candied fruits and vegetables; pickled
`vegetables; pickled cucumbers; pickles; fermented bean curds; eggs;
`mullet roes; fish egg; preserved eggs; chicken essence; meat essence;
`soft-shelled turtle essence; eel essence; edible pollen; lecithin
`powder for cooking; tofu; dried bean curds; artificial meat.
`
`Foreign Country Name
`TAIWAN
`
`Foreign Registration Number
`00937235
`
`Foreign Registration Date
`2001/03/16
`
`-1-
`
`

`

`Print: Dec 22, 2017
`
`85228977
`
`Foreign Expiration Date
`2019/06/30
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`1165724;2956568;3192680
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of a five petaled design with the Chinese character
`niu in the upper middle portion of the petaled design and the Chinese
`character tou in the lower right portion of the petaled design all
`within a circle.
`
`Colors Claimed
`Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`Translation Statement
`The English translation of the Chinese characters in the mark is bull
`and head.
`
`Transliteration Statement
`The non-Latin characters in the mark transliterate to niu and tou and
`this means bull and head in English.
`
`Filing Date
`2011/01/28
`
`Examining Attorney
`PERRY, KIMBERLY
`
`Attorney of Record
`David R Haarz
`
`-2-
`
`

`

`
`
`•
`
`

`

`Print: Dec 22, 2017
`
`85467272
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`85467272
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Registration Number
`4263438
`
`Date Registered
`2012/12/25
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`( 2) DESIGN ONLY
`
`OWner
`HAW-DI-I FOODS CO., LTD. CORPORATION TAIWAN Sinshih District No. 160,
`Fongrong, Daying Village Tainan City TAIWAN
`
`Goods/Services
`IC 029. US 046. G & S: bean curd jelly;
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`edible fat; non-confectionery fruit jellies; meats; meat paste, meat
`broth. meat soup, minced pork paste; edible not live aquatic animals;
`edible not live aquatic animal products, namely, fish balls, fish
`soup, dried bonitos; meat broth; condensed meat broth; instant
`condensed meat broth; block broth; prepared soup stock; soup stock
`powder; instant seafood soup; dried fruits and vegetables; frozen
`fruits and vegetables; dehydrated fruits and vegetables; candied
`fruits and vegetables; pickles; instant or pre-cooked vegetable soup;
`instant or pre-cooked vegetable stew; vegetable soup; canned sweet
`kernel corn; corn soup; eggs; fruit jams; beancurds; prepared meals
`consisting primarily of meat substitutes; vegetarian soup; protein
`powder for human consumption used as food additives.
`
`Foreign Country Name
`TAIWAN
`
`Foreign Registration Number
`01425058
`
`Foreign Registration Date
`2010/08/16
`
`-1-
`
`

`

`Print: Dec 22, 2017
`
`85467272
`
`Foreign Expiration Date
`2020/08/15
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`3192680;4086641;4141089;AND OTHERS
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE THE NON-LATIN
`CHARACTERS THAT TRANSLITERATE TO "PAI" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of fanciful depiction of a bull's head having two
`horns and a chef's hat on the top of its head and a pince-nez on its
`nose, said bull's head being within and partially overlapping the
`first two of four concentric circles with the inner-most circle having
`four stars to the left of the bull's head and five stars to the right
`of the bull's head and two smaller circles overlaying the top of the
`concentric circles with a five clover leaf design and the Chinese
`characters "niu," "tau" and "pai" within the clover leaf design and
`having a three portion folded ribbon overlapping the bottom portion of
`the concentric circles and having the Chinese characters "niu," "tou"
`and "pai" within the middle portion of the ribbon.
`
`Colors Claimed
`Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`Transliteration Statement
`The non-Latin characters in the mark transliterate to "niu tau pai"
`and this means "bull's head brand" in English.
`
`Filing Date
`2011/11/08
`
`Examining Attorney
`MCCAULEY, BRENDAN
`
`Attorney of Record
`David R Haarz
`
`-2-
`
`

`

`
`
`

`

`Print: Dec 22, 2017
`
`85467301
`
`DESIGN MARK
`
`Serial Number
`85467301
`
`Status
`REGISTERED
`
`Registration Number
`4278185
`
`Date Registered
`2013/01/22
`
`Type of Mark
`TRADEMARK
`
`Register
`PRINCIPAL
`
`Mark Drawing Code
`( 2) DESIGN ONLY
`
`OWner
`HAW-DI-I FOODS CO., LTD. CORPORATION TAIWAN Sinshih District No. 160,
`Fongrong, Daying Village Tainan City TAIWAN
`
`Goods/Services
`IC 030. US 046. G & S: tea; tea based
`Class Status -- ACTIVE.
`beverages; coffee; cocoa; chocolate powder; coffee based beverages;
`cocoa based beverages; chocolate based beverages; ice; ice cream;
`salt; soya sauce; sauces; vinegar; spices; satay sauce; barbecue
`sauce; satay sauce powder; sugar; honey; candies; cookies; snack chips
`made from cereal; breads; cakes; hamburger sandwiches; puddings; pies;
`steamed buns stuffed with mince meat; steamed radish pastry; dumplings
`stuffed with fish; dumplings stuffed with eggs; Chinese stuffed
`dumplings; tapiocas; sago; wafers; instant noodles; beef noodles;
`noodles; Chinese steamed dumplings; ravioli; spring roll pastry sheets
`in the nature of uncooked dough; ravioli pastry sheets in the nature
`of uncooked dough; dough; yeast; meat tenderizers for household
`purposes; food thickening agents; ginger sauces; sweet corn sauce.
`
`Foreign Country Name
`TAIWAN
`
`Foreign Registration Number
`01425217
`
`Foreign Registration Date
`2010/08/16
`
`-1-
`
`

`

`Print: Dec 22, 2017
`
`85467301
`
`Foreign Expiration Date
`2020/08/15
`
`Prior Registration(s)
`1165724;2956568;3192680;AND OTHERS
`
`Disclaimer Statement
`NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE THE NON-LATIN
`CHARACTERS THAT TRANSLITERATE TO PAI APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN.
`
`Description of Mark
`The mark consists of fanciful depiction of a bull's head having two
`horns and a chef's hat on the top of its head and a pince-nez on its
`nose, said bull's head being within and partially overlapping the
`first two of four concentric circles with the inner-most circle having
`four stars to the left of the bull's head and five stars to the right
`of the bull's head and two smaller circles overlaying the top of the
`concentric circles with a five clover leaf design and the Chinese
`characters "niu," "tau" and "pai" within the clover leaf design and
`having a three portion folded ribbon overlapping the bottom portion of
`the concentric circles and having the Chinese characters "niu", "tou"
`and "pai" within the middle portion of the ribbon.
`
`Colors Claimed
`Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark.
`
`Transliteration Statement
`The non-Latin characters in the mark transliterate to "niu tau pai"
`and this means bull's head brand in English.
`
`Filing Date
`2011/11/08
`
`Examining Attorney
`MCCAULEY, BRENDAN
`
`Attorney of Record
`David R Haarz
`
`-2-
`
`

`

`
`
`

`

`https://www.census.gov/ con tent/dam/Census/library/publications/2013 /acs/acs-22.pdf 12/22/2017 10:44AM
`
`Language Use in the United States: 2011
`American Community Survey Reports
`
`By Camille Ryan
`Issued August 20 l 3
`ACS-22
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`English is the language spoken by most people in the
`United States. The official language of many states is
`English 1 and it is the language used in nearly all gov(cid:173)
`ernmental functions. Despite this predominance, many
`people in the United States speak languages other
`than English , and there has long been an interest in
`these groups and in how well they are able to partici(cid:173)
`pate in civic life and interact with the English-speaking
`majority. Beginning in 1890, the U.S. Census Bureau
`started inquiring about the languages that people
`spoke and, with some interru ptions in the middle of
`the twentieth century, similar questions continue to
`this day.
`
`The primary purpose of the current question s
`on language use is to measure the portion of the
`U.S. population that may need help in understand-
`ing English. These data are used in a wide variety of
`legislative, policy, and research applications as well as
`for legal, financial, and marketing decisions. People
`w ho speak a particular language other than English
`and cannot speak English "very well" can be helped
`with translation services, education, or assistance in
`accessing government services. The federal govern(cid:173)
`ment uses data on language use and English-speaking
`ability to determine which local areas must provide
`language-assistance services under the Voting Rights
`Act. These data are also used t o allocate educational
`fund s to states to help their schools teach students
`w ith lower lev els of Engli sh proficiency. In 2000 ,
`
`Figure l .
`Reproduction of the Questions on
`Language From the 2011 American
`Community Survey
`
`' a. Does this person speak a language other than
`English at home?
`D Yes
`D No-+ SKIP to question 15a
`b. What is this language?
`
`For example: Korean, Italian, Spanish, Vietnamese
`c. How well does this person speak English?
`D Very well
`D Well
`D Not well
`D Not at all
`
`Source: U.S. Ce nsus Bu re au, 20 l l American Community Survey.
`
`President Clinton signed an executive order req uir-
`ing fed eral agencies to ide nt ify the need for services
`to those with limited English proficiency (LEP) and to
`implement a system to provide meaningful access to
`language-assistance services. Agencies rely on these
`data to determine how and where to provide lan guage(cid:173)
`assistance services. 2 Many other institutions, organi za(cid:173)
`tions, local gov ernments, and private enterp rises make
`use of these data in similar ways .
`
`1 Schildkraut, Deborah, 2001, "Official-English and the States:
`Influences on Declaring English the Official Language in the United
`States," Polit1cal Research Quar terly, Vol. 54, No. 2: pp. 445- 457.
`
`2 See <www.lep.gov>.
`
`U.S. Department of Commerce
`Economics and Statistics Administration
`U.S. CENSUS BUREAU
`ce11sus.gov
`
`

`

`The Census Bureau collected
`language data in the l 980 , 1990,
`and 2000 decennial censuses using
`a series of three questions asked
`of the population 5 years old and
`over. The first question asked if
`the person spoke a language other
`than English at home. Those who
`responded "yes" to this question
`were then asked t o report the lan(cid:173)
`guage that they spoke. The Census
`Bureau coded these responses into
`38 l detai led language categories.
`The third questio n asked how well
`that person spoke English, with
`answer categories of "very w ell, "
`"well," "not well," and "not at all."
`Beginning in 20 l 0, the questions
`were no longer asked on the decen(cid:173)
`nial census. These same three ques(cid:173)
`tions (Figure l ) are now asked each
`year on the American Community
`Survey (ACS), which is the primary
`source of language data.
`
`This report relies primarily on data
`from the 201 l ACS. Language and
`English-speaking ability questions
`that w ere historically co I lected once
`ev ery l 0 y ears in the decennial
`census are now captured annu-
`ally in the ACS. The ACS collect s
`informatio n fro m a large an nual
`sample of approximately 3 m il-
`lio n housing unit addresses and
`therefore provides more reliable
`statistics. The ACS is ad ministered
`t o a sample of the entire resident
`pop ulation, including those liv ing in
`g roup quarters, which makes most
`estimates from the ACS comparab le
`w ith those from earlie r censuses .3
`Takin g advantage of this fact , the
`report also provides a histo ri-
`cal look at languages othe r than
`Eng lish spoken in the United Stat es
`since 1980 . The re port also looks
`at characteristi cs of the population
`speaking a lang uage other than
`
`3 A paper comparing ACS data to ce nsus
`data w as prepared by the Ce nsus Bureau in
`2008. See <www.ce nsus.gov/acs/www
`/Downloads/library/2008/Language
`_Corn parison_Re port_2008-03. pdf>.
`
`Four Major Language Groups
`
`Spanish includes Spanish, Spanish Creole, and Ladino.
`
`Other lndo-European languages include most languages
`of Europe and the lndic languages of India. These include the
`Germanic languages, such as German, Yiddish, and Dutch; the
`Scandinavian languages, such as Swedish and Norwegian ; the
`Romance languages, such as French , Italian, and Portuguese ; the
`Slavic languages, such as Russian , Polish, and Serbo-Croatian;
`the lndic languages, such as Hindi, Gujarati, Punjabi, and Urdu;
`Celtic languages; Greek; Baltic languages; and Iranian languages.
`
`Asian and Pacific Island languages include Chinese; Korean ;
`Japanese; Vietnamese; Hmong; Khmer; Lao; Thai; Tagalog or
`Pilipino; the Dravidian languages of India, such as Telugu , Tamil ,
`and Malayalam; and other languages of Asia and the Pacific,
`including the Philippine, Polynesian , and Micronesian languages.
`
`All Other languages include Uralic languages, such as
`Hungarian; the Semitic languages, such as Arabic and Hebrew;
`languages of Africa; native North American languages,
`including the American Indian and Alaska native languages;
`and indigenous languages of Central and South America.
`
`English. The ACS also provides
`reliable estimates for small levels
`of geog raphy, in cluding co unties,
`cities, and tracts, allowing explora(cid:173)
`tion of the distribution of language
`use across stat es and metropolitan
`areas of the Un ited States .
`
`groups (Table l ). The simplest uses
`four maj or groups: Spanish , Other
`Ind a-Eu ropean languages, Asian
`and Pacifi c Island lang uages, and
`All Othe r languages. These four
`groups are explained further in the
`text b ox .
`
`LANGUAGES SPOKEN
`
`Tab le l prov ides some bas ic infor(cid:173)
`mation from the 201 l ACS abo ut
`speakers of no n-En glish lang uages
`and th eir English-speaking ab ility.
`Of 29 1.5 million peo ple aged 5 and
`over, 60.6 millio n people (2 l per(cid:173)
`ce nt of this pop ulation) spoke a lan(cid:173)
`guage other than En glish at home.
`While the Census Bu reau codes 38 l
`detailed languages, data tabulations
`are not generally available for all of
`these detailed groups . In st ead, the
`Census Bureau collapses languages
`into smaller sets of "language
`groups." The most det ail used in
`standard data prod uct s separates
`o ut 39 lang uages and language
`
`One q uestion that sometimes arises
`is, "How many languages are spo(cid:173)
`ken in the United States?" To answ er
`this q uestion, w e have to decide
`what co nstitutes a unique lan g uage.
`To dev elop its list of la nguages, th e
`Cens us Bu reau consulted refer-
`ence works such as Ethnologue:
`Languages of the Wor/d,4 which
`list s 6,909 lang uages. From these
`sou rces , the Census Bureau created
`a list of 38 l languages, with less
`detail provided for languages ra rely
`spoken in this country. Accepting
`this list, a second issue is t hat th e
`count of languag es is limited t o
`t hose that peo ple report speak ing
`
`4 See <ww w.eth nologue.corn>.
`
`2
`
`U.S. Ce nsus Bureau
`
`

`

`Table l.
`Detailed Languages Spoken at Home by English-Speaking Ability for the Population
`5 Years and Over: 2011
`(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see
`www.census.gov/acs/www/)
`
`Characteristics
`
`Population
`5 years
`and over
`(Number)
`Population 5 years and over .. . . . . .. . . .. 291,524,091
`Spoke only English at home ..
`230,94 7,071
`
`Spoke a language other than English at home . . .
`
`60,577,020
`
`Spanish or Spanish Creole ...............
`
`37,579,787
`
`Other lndo-European languages:
`French
`French Creole. ... . . . . . . . . . .
`Italian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`. . . .. . . . . . . . .
`Portuguese .
`German .
`Yiddish.
`Other West Germanic languages.
`Scandinavian languages . . . . . . .........
`Greek.
`. .
`. . .
`.. .
`Russian ..
`Polish. .. . ........ . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . .
`Serbo-Croatian . .
`Other Slavic languages .
`Armenian.
`. .
`Persian.
`. . ... .
`Gujarati. . . .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .... . . . . . . . .
`. .
`Hindi.
`Urdu.
`Other lndic languages .................
`Other lndo-European languages . . . . . . . . .
`Asian and Pacific Island languages:
`Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`Japanese .
`Korean.
`Mon-Khmer, Cambodian . . . . . .. . .
`Hmong ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`. . ... .
`..
`Thai.
`Laotian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`Vietnamese.
`Other Asian languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`Tagalog . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . .........
`Other Pacific Island languages.
`
`Other languages:
`Navajo .
`Other Native American languages . . . . ....
`....... ... . .
`Hungarian.
`Arabic. ................ .. . . . . . . . . . . .
`Hebrew .
`African languages.
`All other lanquaqes. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........
`
`1,301,443
`753,990
`723,632
`673,566
`1,083,637
`160,968
`290,461
`135,025
`304,928
`905,843
`607,531
`269,624
`336,062
`246,915
`407,586
`358,422
`648,983
`373,851
`815,345
`449,600
`
`2,882,497
`436,110
`1,141 ,277
`212,505
`211 ,227
`163,251
`140,866
`1,419,539
`855,303
`1,594,413
`428,476
`
`169,369
`195,407
`93,102
`951,699
`216,343
`884,660
`153,777
`
`Spoke a
`language
`other than
`English
`at home'
`(Percent)
`x
`x
`
`100.0
`
`62.0
`
`2.1
`1.2
`1.2
`1.1
`1.8
`0.3
`0.5
`0.2
`0.5
`1.5
`1.0
`0.4
`0.6
`0.4
`0.7
`0.6
`1.1
`0.6
`1.3
`0.7
`
`4.8
`0.7
`1.9
`0.4
`0.3
`0.3
`0.2
`2.3
`1.4
`2.6
`0.7
`
`0.3
`0.3
`0.2
`1.6
`0.4
`1.5
`0.3
`
`English-speaking ability'
`(Percent)
`
`Spoke
`English
`"very well'
`x
`x
`
`Spoke
`English
`''well"
`x
`x
`
`Spoke
`English
`"not well"
`x
`x
`
`Spoke
`English
`"not at all"
`x
`x
`
`58.2
`
`56.3
`
`79.6
`56.8
`73.5
`61.8
`82.9
`68.4
`77.6
`90.6
`75.3
`52.3
`60.0
`61.7
`62.1
`53.8
`62.7
`63.8
`77.0
`70.0
`60.6
`65.1
`
`44.3
`57.5
`44.5
`47.1
`56.7
`43.4
`50.9
`39.8
`69.3
`67.2
`61.6
`
`78.8
`85.4
`71.0
`63.3
`84.7
`68.1
`56.3
`
`19.4
`
`17.8
`
`13.9
`23.8
`17.1
`20.8
`13.1
`17.7
`17.9
`7.7
`15.5
`25.6
`23.4
`21.9
`22.8
`22.2
`21.9
`20.2
`16.3
`19.3
`23.7
`21.5
`
`26.1
`27.4
`270
`23.4
`22.2
`34.8
`22.1
`27.1
`19.6
`25.6
`25.7
`
`14.2
`11.4
`21.1
`21 .7
`11.9
`21 .1
`19.7
`
`15.4
`
`16.9
`
`5.9
`15.2
`8.6
`13.5
`3.6
`10.2
`3.7
`1.6
`7.8
`16.8
`13.8
`13.6
`11.9
`16.5
`12.0
`12.2
`5.3
`9.2
`10.9
`9.9
`
`19.9
`13.9
`24.4
`22.9
`14.9
`18.9
`22.7
`25.8
`8.4
`6.7
`11 .7
`
`4.8
`2.9
`7.3
`11 .9
`2.9
`8.6
`14.8
`
`7.0
`
`9.0
`
`0.6
`4.3
`0.8
`3.9
`0.3
`3.7
`0.8
`0.1
`1.4
`5.3
`2.8
`2.9
`3.3
`7.6
`3.4
`3.8
`1.4
`1.5
`4.9
`3.4
`
`9.7
`1.2
`4.0
`6.6
`6.2
`2.8
`4.3
`7.3
`2.7
`0.5
`1.1
`
`2.2
`0.3
`0.7
`3.1
`0.5
`2.1
`9.3
`
`X Not applicable
`'The percentage in this column 1s calculated as the number of speakers of the specific language divided by the total number of those who spoke a language
`other than English at home (60,577,020).
`2 The percentages for these columns are calculated as the number of those who spoke English "very we11:· "well," "not well," or "not at all" for a particular lan(cid:173)
`guage divided by the total number of those who spoke that language.
`Note: Margins of error for all estimates can be found in the Appendix Table 1 <WWW.census.gov/hhes/socdemoAanguage/data/acsffablet .xis>. For more infor(cid:173)
`mation on the ACS, see <WWW census gov/acs/wwwi>
`Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey
`
`U.S. Census Bu re au
`
`3
`
`

`

`the language at home. Therefore,
`while no definitive answer to the
`question is available, a tabulation
`from the 2006-2008 ACS listed
`over 300 languages spoken in the
`United States. 5
`
`Many of the languages spoken in
`the United States are native North
`American languages. The ACS
`provides codes for 169 distinct
`native North American languages,
`and l 34 of these languages were
`recorded in the tabulations from
`2006-2008. In 2011, the Census
`Bureau published a brief report on
`native North American languages
`spoken in the United States. 6
`
`ENGLISH-SPEAKING ABILITY
`
`Most people who spoke a non(cid:173)
`Eng lish language at home also
`reported that they spoke English
`"very well" (Table 4). Overall, the
`proportion was 58 percent who
`spoke "very well," with another
`19 percent who spoke English
`"well, " 15 percent who spoke "not
`well," and 7 percent who spoke
`English "not at all. "
`
`The usefulness of the self-rated
`English-speaking ability question
`was established in the 1980s,
`when research confirmed a strong
`relation between this rating and
`separate tests of ability to perform
`
`s See <www.ce nsus.gov/hhes/socdemo
`/ language/data/oth er/ detai led-lang-tables
`.xis>.
`6 See <www.ce nsus.gov/prod/2 01 l pubs
`/acsbrl 0-l 0.pdf>.
`
`tasks in English. 7 In many of its
`tables, the Census Bureau makes
`a distinction between those who
`speak English only or speak English
`"very well" on the one hand and
`those who speak English less than
`"very well" on the other.
`
`Even among the speakers of
`the top ten languages, English(cid:173)
`speaking ability varied greatly
`(Figure 2) . A high proportion
`(80 percent or more) of French and
`German speakers spoke English
`"very well. " In contrast, less than
`50 percent of those who spoke
`Korean, Chinese , or Vietnamese
`spoke English "very well." The
`proportion of those who spoke
`English "very well" among Russian,
`Spanish , French Creole, Arabic, and
`Tagalog speakers ranged from
`52 percent to 67 percent.
`
`Among the most common non(cid:173)
`English languages in 2011, Spanish
`experienced growth in the past
`several years. Interestingly, while
`the percentage of the total popula(cid:173)
`tion 5 years and over who spoke
`Spanish increased from 2005 to
`2011, the percentage of the total
`population who spoke Spanish and
`spoke English less than "very well"
`actually decreased (Figure 3). The
`percentage of the total population
`5 years and over who spoke
`Spanish grew from 12.0 percent
`
`7 See Department of Education, Office
`of Planning Budget and Evaluation, 1987,
`"Numbers of Limited En glish Proficient
`Childre n: National, State and Lang uage(cid:173)
`Specific Estimates" (April) mimeo, which
`examined the school-aged population and