Appeal No. 94-3053
Application 07/832,661
It would have been obvious to a person
having ordinary skill in the art to provide
Poret’s on-chip counters in Hester’s chip
because they support the clearly desirable
aspects of increased flexibility in
controlling debugging operations.
Answer at 8. In view of the above discussion with regard to
claim 28, we will not sustain this rejection.
Claim 61
Claim 61 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in
view of Hester. Appellants concede that all of the
limitations recited in that claim are met by Hester except:
issuing a signal from the on-chip condition
sensor to the electronic processor upon
detection of the predetermined condition.
Brief at 4-5.
However, Hester meets the above language by teaching
that the support processor "include[s] the ability to examine
and
alter registers in the system microprocessor" (col. 2, lines
59-61) and "control[s] and examine[s] the contents of all
29
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007