Obviousness

To conduct an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for US Patent 7051306, it is crucial to identify specific prior art references cited during its prosecution. The "Prior art keywords" and the "Description of the Prior Art" sections within the provided patent text describe general challenges and existing techniques (like static voltage islands or multiple clocks) but do not list specific patent or publication numbers that could be combined for an obviousness argument.

A search for "US7051306 cited prior art" or "US7051306 references cited" did not yield an explicit list of prior art documents directly within the provided patent text or its immediate metadata. Without specific prior art references (e.g., other patents, scientific publications), it is not possible to perform a detailed obviousness analysis by combining their disclosed elements.

Therefore, I cannot identify combinations of prior art references that would render the claims of US7051306 obvious, nor can I explain the motivation for combining them, because no specific prior art references were provided or found within the authoritative patent text for this analysis.

To proceed with such an analysis, a list of prior art documents cited by the examiner or applicant during the prosecution of US7051306 would be required. This list typically includes specific patent numbers or non-patent literature that were considered relevant to the patentability of the claims. Once such references are available, each reference would need to be analyzed for its disclosures, and then a determination would be made as to whether a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would have been motivated to combine the teachings of two or more references to arrive at the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success.