Appeal No. 2004-2368
Application No. 09/395,854 Page 5
first stage.’" As an example, appellants assert (brief, page 6)
that for this example, we assume that there are two latches, one
being the first stage and the other being the second stage. In
this example, if the output of the two latches is bad, and we
retest the data coming out of the upstream latch and find it to
be good, we can presume that the downstream latch is defective.
If we find that the data from the upstream latch is bad, it
confirms that the upstream latch is bad, but we cannot determine
if the downstream latch is bad or not. In either case, the input
data to both latches remains the same, and the upstream latch has
not been bypassed by either the input data or the probe. As a
second example, appellants use the sixteen latches disclosed in
figure 5 of Lindberg. Appellants assert (brief, page 7) that if
the output of the sixteen latches is bad, the probe is then
placed in the center of the series, and moved left or right until
the defective latch is located. However, appellants assert (id.)
that the data input is still input into the left-most latch,
which is never bypassed by the input data or the probe. Another
example provided by appellants is where the last two latches are
labeled 1 and 0 respectively. By moving the probe from the input
of latch 1 to the output of latch 0, the latch tested has
bypassed the first stage. However, doing so does not tell the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007