Unisys Corp.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 23, 1998

No. 74708824 (T.T.A.B. Jan. 23, 1998)

Paper No. 10
PTH
THIS DISPOSITION IS NOT CITABLE
AS PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB 1/23/98
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
________
In re Unisys Corporation
________
Serial No. 74/708,824
_______
Thomas J. Scott for Unisys Corporation.
Josette M. Beverly, Trademark Examining Attorney, Law Office
102 (Myra Kurzbard, Managing Attorney).
_______
Before Hohein, Hairston and Walters, Administrative
Trademark Judges.
Opinion by Hairston, Administrative Trademark Judge:
This is an appeal from the Trademark Examining
Attorney’s final refusal to register the mark SERVER/CLIENT
for “computer software, namely a series of object-oriented
software development programs used to build programs, run
and manage networks” and “printed publications, namely
programmer, operator, installation and maintenance manuals
Ser No. 74/708,824
2
for use with object-oriented software development tools used
to build programs, run and manage networks.”1
Registration has been finally refused under Section
2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1), on the
ground that the mark merely describes applicant’s goods.
Applicant and the Examining Attorney have filed briefs,
but no oral hearing was requested.
In support of the refusal to register, the Examining
Attorney has submitted dictionary definitions of the terms
“server” and “client.” The Computer Dictionary (2d ed.
1994) defines “server” as:
On a local area network, a computer running
administrative software that controls access
to all or part of the network and its resources
(such as disk drives and printers). A computer
acting as a server makes resources available to
computers acting as workstations on the network.
“Client” is defined therein as:
In object-oriented programming, a member of a
class (group) that uses the services of another
class to which it is not related. . . . On a
local area network, a computer that accesses
shared network resources provided by another
computer (called a server).
In addition, the Examining Attorney submitted a number
of excerpts from the NEXIS data base in which the terms
“server” and “client” are used. The following are
representative examples:
Server and client software comes on two disks,

1 Application Serial No. 74/708,824 filed July 31, 1995, alleging
a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce.
Ser No. 74/708,824
3
and you install Imagery HSM at a Microsoft
Windows client.
(LAN Times, March 4, 1996);
CD Net 2.0 for Windows NT, due this month,
costs $995 per server. Client software starts
at $795 for 25 users.
(InfoWorld, February 12, 1996);
The world’s first free-of-charge secure
server/client software is available from
INTERWEB INC which incorporates SSL protocol
and is complete with the Netscape Commerce
Server. . .
(Telecomworldwire, February 6, 1996);
Its [USOFT] first act was to buy TopSystems,
establishing itself as the Server/Client
Software Company with a unique Rapid
Application Development environment built
around a dynamic central repository.
(M2 Communications, January 31, 1996);
Progressive Networks Inc. writes server/client
software to make the World Wide Web sing—or
at least talk.
(CommunicationsWeek, January 8, 1996); and
This product represents a major opportunity
for resellers, not just with the installation
and configuration of server and client
software, but with training and the likelihood
of moving into advanced tools for sales forces
that are constantly on the road.
(Computer Reseller News, December 4, 1995).
Applicant, in urging reversal of the refusal to
register, does not dispute that the individual terms, server
and client, and the combined term client server, are
recognized terms in the computer industry.2 However,

2 In the Computer Dictionary, the term “client server
architecture” is defined as: An arrangement used on local area
Ser No. 74/708,824
4
applicant contends that the term SERVER/CLIENT is ingenuous
as used in connection with its goods; that the term
SERVER/CLIENT is not listed in dictionaries and is not a
recognized term in the industry; and that applicant was the
first to use the term SERVER/CLIENT. Finally, as evidence
that the term SERVER/CLIENT is associated with applicant,
applicant points to the following excerpt from an evaluation
of applicant’s computer software published by The
ButlerBloor Organisation:
USoft calls itself the server/client company.
This is well thought out. It makes the reader
stop and think. Most particularly, it reflects
the emphasis on the server. Unlike some so-
called competitive products, which are really
client development tools and actually do very
little at the server level, USoft is server-
centric.
A mark is considered to be merely descriptive of goods
or services, under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act, if
it immediately describes an ingredient, quality,

networks that makes use of “distributed intelligence” to treat
both the server and the individual workstations as intelligent,
programmable devices, thus exploiting the full computing power of
each. This is done by splitting the processing of an application
between two distinct components: a “front-end” client and a
“back-end” server. The client component, itself a complete,
stand-alone personal computer (vs. the “dumb” terminal found in
older architecture such as the time-sharing mainframe), offers
the user its full range of power and features for running
applications. The server component, which can be another
personal computer, a mini-computer, or a mainframe, enhances the
client component by providing the traditional strengths offered
by minicomputers and mainframes in a time-sharing environment:
data management, information sharing between clients, and
sophisticated network administration and security features.
Ser No. 74/708,824
5
characteristic or feature thereof or if it directly conveys
information regarding the nature, function, purpose or use
of the goods or services. See In re Abcor Development
Corp., 588 F. 2d 811, 200 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1978). Moreover,
“[a]bsent any incongruity or other distinctive aspect, a
combination of terms each of which is descriptive of a
characteristic or feature of a product or service is also
merely descriptive.” In re Serv-A-Portion, Inc., 1 USPQ2d
1915, 1916 (TTAB 1986).
In this case, each of the words comprising the term
SERVER/CLIENT describes a component of applicant’s computer
software, and we find nothing incongruous or distinctive
about the combination. Inasmuch as applicant admits that
the focus of its computer software is on the server, rather
than the client, there is nothing ingenuous about the
juxtaposition of the terms server and client. Moreover, the
inclusion of the slash mark between the words does not make
them registrable. See Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Concorde
Battery Corporation, 228 USPQ 39 (TTAB 1985).
As to applicant’s remaining arguments, the fact that
the term SERVER/CLIENT is not found in dictionaries is not
controlling on the question of registrability. See In re
Medical Plastics, Inc., 192 USPQ 237 (TTAB 1976)). Also,
the fact that applicant may have been the first to use the
term SERVER/CLIENT in connection with computer programs and
Ser No. 74/708,824
6
manuals does not alter the descriptive significance of the
term and bestow trademark rights therein upon applicant.
See In re MBAssociates, 180 USPQ 338 (TTAB 1973).
Here, the term SERVER/CLIENT immediately conveys to the
relevant consumers that applicant’s computer software
consists of server and client components and that its
manuals are for use with such components. We note that in
two of the NEXIS excerpts the term SERVER/CLIENT is used as
the name of a type of computer software. No amount of
imagination or speculation is necessary for customers and
prospective purchasers to readily perceive the descriptive
significance of the term SERVER/CLIENT as applied to
applicant’s computer software and manuals.
Decision: The refusal to register is affirmed.
G. D. Hohein
P. T. Hairston
C. E. Walters
Administrative Trademark
Judges, Trademark Trial and
Appeal Board
Ser No. 74/708,824
7