Ex Parte YONEMOTO - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2002-1046                                                        
          Application 08/861,831                                                      

          an amplifying type solid-state imaging device such as a MOS                 
          (metal oxide semiconductor) solid-state imaging device.  See page           
          1 of Appellant’s specification.  Figure 1 shows an example of a             
          capacity loaded operation system amplifying type solid-state                
          imaging device.  A load capacity element 8 for holding a signal             
          voltage is connected through an operation MOS switch 7 to a                 
          vertical signal line 5.  An operation pulse is applied to the               
          gate of the operation MOS switch 7.  The load capacity element 8            
          is connected to the drain of the horizontal MOS switch 9, and the           
          source of this horizontal MOS switch 9 is connected to a                    
          horizontal signal line 10.  See page 2 of Appellant’s                       
          specification.  Figure 2 is a plan view illustrating a horizontal           
          MOS switch shown 9 in figure 1.  See page 5 of Appellant’s                  
          specification.  Since the source regions 22s of the horizontal              
          switches 9 are connected to the horizontal signal line 10, a                
          parasitic capacity of the horizontal line 10 is increased, thus             
          lowering a detection sensitivity of the charge detecting circuit            
          16.  See page 6 of Appellant’s specification.  Thus, it is the              
          object of Appellant’s invention to provide a solid-state imaging            
          device wherein a detection sensitivity can be improved by                   
          decreasing a parasitic capacity of a horizontal signal line.  See           
          page 6 of Appellant’s specification.  Figure 3 is a diagram                 
                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007