Appeal No. 2001-2692 Page 16
Application No. 08/789,001
not contain this combination." (Id.) As construed in addressing the rejection by
Modarres, claim 38 requires at least one bi-directional element.
Because the method of Aubertine assigns input/output pins, we find that at least
some of the pins are bi-directional. Therefore, we affirm the anticipation rejection of
claim 30 by Aubertine.
Fourth, observing that claim 3 "further limits some of the macro cells," (Appeal
Br. at 29), the appellants argue, "[t]his limitation is not taught in any of the prior art of
record. . . ." (Id.) As construed in addressing the rejection by Modarres, claim 3 further
specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: "selected ones of the input macro
cells include a boundary scan logic module, said boundary scan logic module having a
number of terminals."
The examiner does not allege, let alone show, however, that the reference
discloses the aforementioned limitations. We will not resort to speculation as to such a
possible disclosure. Therefore, we reverse the anticipation rejection of claim 3 by
Aubertine.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007