Appeal No. 98-1897 Application No. 07/715,144 display screen, a large display screen, a circular screen, a curved screen, etc.” Thus, there is no support for an icon embodied in the article of manufacture now attempted to be shown by appellants with broken lines. There is no evidence that appellants had possession of the particular design, i.e., the keyboard input icon embodied in a screen in the particular manner shown by the amended drawings, at the time of filing the application. For the reasons given by the examiner at pages 4-11 of the answer, which we adopt as our own, we will sustain the rejection of the design claim under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. As an additional reason for sustaining this rejection, we note that the evidence indicates that at the time of filing the original application, appellants had no intention of disclosing or claiming a computer display with a keyboard input icon, but, rather, appellants were interested only in obtaining protection for the design of the icon, itself. We note the original title, “Keyboard Input Icon For a Computer Display” [emphasis ours]. Thus, the display, itself, and/or the icon’s relationship with such display appears to have been of no interest to appellants. It was clearly the icon, 6Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007