Appeal No. 97-2111
Application 08/158,345
consistent with the standard set forth by the Joint Test Action
Group (JTAG)[column 1]. This standard includes several
instructions such as EXTEST, INTEST and RUNBIST as noted by
Burchard [column 10, lines 11-12]. Thus, Burchard clearly
suggests to the artisan that a conventional Boundary-Scan
architecture is designed to receive the external test (EXTEST)
instruction. Appellant’s own disclosure states “[t]hese system
action instructions are known and include EXTEST, INTEST,
RUNBIST, CLAMP, and HIGHZ instructions” [page 10]. Therefore,
the EXTEST instruction which will assert a system action is
clearly present in Burchard, and the Burchard device obviously
determines the presence of this signal.
Appellant argues that neither reference teaches the step
of “requesting control of said data and control bus prior to said
assertion of said system action in the context of a boundary-scan
master” [brief, pages 6-7]. We fail to see the relevance of the
Boundary-Scan master in the invention of claim 20. The preamble
of claim 20 recites that the Boundary-Scan master is connected to
a data and control bus. The body of claim 20 recites an
interaction with the data and control bus, but not specifically
with the Boundary-Scan master. Thus, we do not view the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007