One thing to consider though in this - In the original ``749`` patent (before it was broken up) the ring oscillator described is very similar to the later (`336) patent, but the secondary fixed I/O clock is ``Asynchonous``. But in the later patent (the `336) the secondary I/O clock is ``Synchronous``, with I would think, some other corresponding changes.

So as I asked before, is this enough of a change to cloud the issue?...I have no idea. Maybe Falk knew of both, but I think the secondary I/O clock issue (going to a synchonous clock) is the ``Fish clock design``, incorporated in the 1998 patent...was Falk alive then?

Regards