Corporate Express, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 28, 2007

No. 78657648 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 28, 2007)

Mailed:
June 28, 2007

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________

In re Corporate Express, Inc.
________

Serial No. 78657648
_______

Miriam D. Trudell and Sabrina C. Stavish of Sheridan Ross
for Corporate Express, Inc.

Evelyn Bradley, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
105 (Thomas G. Howell, Managing Attorney).
_______

Before Walters, Holtzman and Bergsman, Administrative
Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Walters, Administrative Trademark Judge:

Corporate Express, Inc. seeks registration on the
Principal Register of the mark EVERYTHING FOR YOUR OFFICE.
TO YOUR OFFICE. (in standard character form) for the
following services:
retail store and on-line retail store services
featuring a full line of office products and
supplies, business furniture and interiors,
computers, computer accessories and software,
cleaning equipment and supplies, stationery,
school supplies, imaging and computer graphic

THIS OPINION IS NOT A
PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB
Ser. No. 78657648
2
supplies, promotional products, document and
print management supplies, workplace safety
equipment and supplies, electronic devices and
equipment, and telephones; retail supply
services, retail telephone order services and
electronic online catalog services to commercial
customers featuring a full line of office
products and supplies, business furniture and
interiors, computers, computer accessories and
software, cleaning equipment and supplies,
stationery, school supplies, imaging and computer
graphic supplies, promotional products, document
and print management supplies, workplace safety
equipment and supplies, electronic devices and
equipment, and telephones; wholesale
distributorship services featuring a full line of
office products and supplies, business furniture
and interiors, computers, computer accessories
and software, cleaning equipment and supplies,
stationery, school supplies, imaging and computer
graphic supplies, promotional products, document
and print management supplies, workplace safety
equipment and supplies, electronic devices and
equipment, and telephones.1

At issue in this appeal is the Trademark Examining
Attorney’s final refusal to register the subject matter of
the application on the ground that applicant is seeking to
register more than one mark in this application. See
Trademark Act Sections 1(a)(1) and 45, 15 U.S.C.
§1051(a)(1) and 1127. The appeal is fully briefed. After
careful consideration of the evidence of record and the
arguments of counsel, we reverse the refusal to register.

1 Serial No. 78657648, filed June 24, 2005. The application is
based on use of the mark in commerce under Trademark Act Section
1(a), 15 U.S.C. §1051(a), alleging first use and use in commerce
as of September 1, 2004.
Ser. No. 78657648
3
The examining attorney contends that the mark in the
drawing does not match the specimens because elements of
the mark on the drawing page appear as separate marks on
the specimen. The examining attorney states in her brief
the following (p. 3): “[t]he literal elements of the mark
as depicted in the specimen are not connected and are in
fact separated by a sizeable photograph[;] [t]hese elements
are so far apart that they constitute at least two
different marks.” She adds that “each phrase is punctuated
with a full stop such that they appear to be two separate
marks.” (Id.)
Applicant contends in the following statement that the
subject matter is clearly and only a single unitary mark:
[T]he specimen shows the mark immediately above
and below a photo of people working in an office.
The mark is all in the same font and size. It is
clear from the specimens that applicant’s
services include the sale and delivery of office
supplies and related products to customers.
Thus, the entire slogan “EVERYTHING FOR YOUR
OFFICE. TO YOUR OFFICE.” as a whole suggests to
the customer the nature of applicant’s retail
services, which include a wide range of office
supplies that may be delivered directly to the
customer. When a consumer reviews the specimens,
the consumer will not stop reading after
EVERYTHING [FOR] YOUR OFFICE. Rather, the
consumer will also read the mark as a whole by
reading the language under the photo as well.

Ser. No. 78657648
4
Applicant argues that the mark does not make sense
when read as two separate marks, stating that “TO YOUR
OFFICE” does not stand alone as a sensible phrase.
The specimen of record is a color advertisement shown
below in black and white.2

2 Applicant submitted additional examples of the use of the alleged mark
and contends that neither the specimens nor additional evidence shows
any use of the terms separated by a photo or other matter.
Not until her brief did the examining attorney object to the
additional materials submitted by applicant. In her brief (p. 4), she
stated the following: “[t]hese advertisements were not submitted as
specimens of record and were not in use as of the filing date of this
application[;] … [o]nly designated specimens of record may be
considered in determining whether a given term would be perceived as a
trademark.”
We find it unnecessary to address the examining attorney’s
concern because we have decided the question by considering only the
specimen of record and, thus, her stated concern is moot.

Ser. No. 78657648
5
We agree with applicant’s contention that the subject
matter of this application is, indeed, a single mark. It
is clearly a slogan consisting of two sentences meant to be
read together because, as applicant points out, the second
sentence makes little sense without the first sentence.
The “EVERYTHING” portion of the first sentence clearly
pertains to both sentences, as the second phrase is
actually an incomplete sentence. The “FOR YOUR OFFICE” and
“TO YOUR OFFICE” are similar prepositional phrases with the
terms “FOR” and “TO” serving as clever one-word changes to
the two phrases that change the connotation of the phrases
to indicate the two parts of applicant’s services – the
availability of the office supplies, and the delivery of
the same.
Additionally, the two sections of the mark appear in
the same size and style font; the two sections of the mark
are the only words on the page in the particular size and
font shown; both sections are right-justified on the page,
with the same right margin as the photo and appearing
immediately above and below the photo; and, finally, the
photograph between the two sections of the mark serves
merely as a pause, allowing the viewer to take in, view,
and appreciate the entire advertising message.
Ser. No. 78657648
6
Therefore, we conclude that the mark in the drawing is
a single mark that is supported by the specimens of use in
the record.
Decision: The refusal to register is reversed.