Go to MPEP - Table of Contents
201.11 Continuity Between Applications: The Benefit of an Earlier Filing Date [R-2] - 200 Types, Cross-Noting, and Status of Application
201.11 Continuity Between Applications: The Benefit of an Earlier Filing Date [R-2]
Under certain circumstances an application for patent is entitled to the benefit of the filing date of a prior nonprovisional application or provisional application which has at least one common inventor. The conditions are specified in 35 U.S.C. 120 for the benefit claim of a prior nonprovisional application and 35 U.S.C. 119(e) for the priority claim of a prior provisional application.
35 U.S.C. 120 Benefit of earlier filing date in the United States.
An application for patent for an invention disclosed in the manner provided by the first paragraph of section 112 of this title in an application previously filed in the United States, or as provided by section 363 of this title, which is filed by an inventor or inventors named in the previously filed application shall have the same effect, as to such invention, as though filed on the date of the prior application, if filed before the patenting or abandonment of or termination of proceedings on the first application or on an application similarly entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the first application and if it contains or is amended to contain a specific reference to the earlier filed application. No application shall be entitled to the benefit of an earlier filed application under this section unless an amendment containing the specific reference to the earlier filed application is submitted at such time during the pendency of the application as required by the Director. The Director may consider the failure to submit such an amendment within that time period as a waiver of any benefit under this section. The Director may establish procedures, including the payment of a surcharge, to accept an unintentionally delayed submission of an amendment under this section.
35 U.S.C. 119 Benefit of earlier filing date; right of priority.
*****
(e)
(1) An application for patent filed under section 111(a) or section 363 of this title for an invention disclosed in the manner provided by the first paragraph of section 112 of this title in a provisional application filed under section 111(b) of this title, by an inventor or inventors named in the provisional application, shall have the same effect, as to such invention, as though filed on the date of the provisional application filed under section 111(b) of this title, if the application for patent filed under section 111(a) or section 363 of this title is filed not later than 12 months after the date on which the provisional application was filed and if it contains or is amended to contain a specific reference to the provisional application. No application shall be entitled to the benefit of an earlier filed provisional application under this subsection unless an amendment containing the specific reference to the earlier filed provisional application is submitted at such time during the pendency of the application as required by the Director. The Director may consider the failure to submit such an amendment within that time period as a waiver of any benefit under this subsection. The Director may establish procedures, including the payment of a surcharge, to accept an unintentionally delayed submission of an amendment under this subsection during the pendency of the application
(2) A provisional application filed under section 111(b) of this title may not be relied upon in any proceeding in the Patent and Trademark Office unless the fee set forth in subparagraph (A) or (C) of section 41(a)(1) of this title has been paid.
(3) If the day that is 12 months after the filing date of a provisional application falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday within the District of Columbia, the period of pendency of the provisional application shall be extended to the next succeeding secular or business day.
There are six conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) or under 35 U.S.C. 119(e).
(A) The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application); the disclosure of the invention in the prior application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112. See Transco Prods., Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See subsection I. "WRITTEN DESCRIPTION" below. Form paragraphs 2.09 and 2.10 should be used where the disclosure of the later-filed application is not for an invention disclosed in the prior application.
¶ 2.09 Heading for Conditions for Domestic Priority Under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120
Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. [1] as follows:
Examiner Note
1. In bracket 1, insert either or both --119(e)-- or --120--.
2. One or more of the following form paragraphs 2.10 to 2.12 must follow depending upon the circumstances.
¶ 2.10 Disclosure Must Be the Same
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application); the disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph must be preceded by heading form paragraph 2.09.
2. Form paragraph 2.29 should be used where the claim(s) of the nonprovisional application lack(s) support in the disclosure of the provisional application.
¶ 2.29 Domestic Priority Not Granted
Applicant's claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) is acknowledged. However, the provisional application upon which priority is claimed fails to provide adequate support under 35 U.S.C. 112 for claim [1] of this application. [2]
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph may be used when there is lack of support in the provisional application for the pending claims in the nonprovisional application.
2. In bracket 2, provide an explanation of lack of support.
(B) With respect to claiming benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c), the later-filed application must be copending with the prior application or with an application similarly entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the prior application. See subsection II. "COPENDENCY" below. With respect to claiming benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to provisional applications, effective November 29, 1999, Public Law 106-113 amended 35 U.S.C. 119(e)(2) to eliminate the copendency requirement for a nonprovisional application claiming benefit of a provisional application. However, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 119(e)(1), the nonprovisional application must be filed not later than 12 months after the date on which the provisional application was filed. If the day that is 12 months after the filing date of a provisional application falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday within the District of Columbia, ** the nonprovisional application may be filed on that next succeeding business day. See 35 U.S.C. *>21(b)<, 37 CFR 1.7(b), and MPEP § 201.04(b) and § 505.
(C) The later-filed application must contain a specific reference to the prior application(s) in the specification or in an application data sheet. If benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c), the specific reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) to a prior nonprovisional application must include the relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) between the applications except when the reference is to a prior application of a continued prosecution application (CPA) assigned the same application number. See subsection III. "REFERENCE TO PRIOR APPLICATION(S)" below. A request for a CPA filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d) is itself the specific reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) to every application assigned the same application number identified in the request. (Note: The CPA is assigned the same application number as the prior application.) >See MPEP § 201.06(d).< In a CPA, a specific reference in the first sentence of the specification following the title, or in an application data sheet, to a prior application assigned the same application number is not required and should not be made. No amendment in a CPA may delete the specific reference to the prior application assigned the same application number. A specific reference to an application not assigned the same application number, but relied on for benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) is required. Cross references to other related applications not assigned the same application >number< as the CPA may be made when appropriate. Form paragraphs 2.09 and 2.12 should be used to indicate reference to the prior application.
**>¶ 2.12 Application Must Contain a Reference to an Earlier Application
An application in which the benefits of an earlier application are desired must contain a specific reference to the prior application(s) in the first sentence of the specification or in an application data sheet ( 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) and (a)(5)). The specific reference to any prior nonprovisional application must include the relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) between the applications except when the reference is to a prior application of a CPA assigned the same application number.
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph must be preceded by heading form paragraph 2.09.
2. This form paragraph should not be used for a continued prosecution application (CPA). In a continued prosecution application (CPA) filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d), a specific reference in the first sentence of the specification or in an application data sheet to the prior application is not required and should not be made. The specific reference requirement of 35 U.S.C. 120 is met by the request for the CPA which is considered to be part of the CPA ( 37 CFR 1.53(d)(2)(iv) and (d)(7).
3. This form paragraph should not be used where priority is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to a prior provisional application.
<
(D) The later-filed application must be filed by an inventor or inventors named in the previously filed application.
(E) For utility or plant applications (including reissues) filed on or after November 29, 2000, benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c) must be made during the pendency of the application and within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(5)(ii). If the application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a), the benefit claim must be made within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. If the application is a nonprovisional application which entered the national stage from an international application after compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, the benefit claim must be made within the later of four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under **> 35 U.S.C.< 371(b) or (f) or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(5)(ii). This time period is not extendable and a failure to submit the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and/or 120, where applicable, within this time period is considered a waiver of any benefit of such prior application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c). For a more detailed explanation, see subsection V. "TIME PERIOD FOR MAKING A CLAIM FOR BENEFIT ( 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) and (a)(5)>)<" below>.< (F) If benefit is being claimed to a provisional application which was filed in a language other than English, (1) an English language translation of the provisional application, and (2) a statement that the translation is accurate, are required to be filed either in the provisional application or in each nonprovisional application that claims the benefit of the provisional application. If the translation and statement were not previously filed in the provisional application or the nonprovisional application, the applicant will be notified in the nonprovisional application and given a period of time within which to file the translation and statement. In a pending nonprovisional application, failure to timely reply to such notice will result in the abandonment of the nonprovisional application. Form paragraph 2.38 may be used to notify applicant that an English translation of the non-English language provisional application is required.
¶ 2.38 Reference to a Non-English Language Provisional Application
This application claims benefit to a provisional application No. [1], filed on [2], in a language other than English. Applications that claim benefit of a provisional application filed in a non-English language must include an English translation of the non-English language provisional application and a statement that the translation is accurate. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5). The [3] as required by 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5) is missing. Applicant must supply the missing [4] in the reply to this Office action prior to the expiration of the time period set in this Office action.
Examiner Note
1. Use this form paragraph to notify applicant that an English translation of the non-English language provisional application and/or a statement that the translation is accurate is required.
2. In bracket 1, insert the application number of the non-English language provisional application.
3. In bracket 2, insert the filing date of the prior provisional application.
4. In brackets 3 and 4, insert --English translation and a statement that the translation is accurate-- or --statement that the translation is accurate--, where appropriate.
I. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION
Under 35 U.S.C. 120, a claim in a U.S. application is entitled to the benefit of the filing date of an earlier filed U.S. application if the subject matter of the claim is disclosed in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, in the earlier filed application. See, e.g., Tronzo v. Biomet, Inc., 156 F.3d 1154, 47 USPQ2d 1829 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Scheiber, 587 F.2d 59, 199 USPQ 782 (CCPA 1978). >A claim in a subsequently filed application that relies on a combination of prior applications may not be entitled to the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 since 35 U.S.C. 120 requires that the earlier filed application contain a disclosure which complies with 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for each claim in the subsequently filed application. Studiengesellschaft Kohle m.b.H. v. Shell Oil Co., 112 F.3d 1561, 1564, 42 USPQ2d 1674, 1677 (Fed. Cir. 1997).<
Under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), the written description and drawing(s) (if any) of the provisional application must adequately support and enable the subject matter claimed in the nonprovisional application that claims the benefit of the provisional application. In New Railhead Mfg., L.L.C. v. Vermeer Mfg. Co., 298 F.3d 1290, 1294, 63 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 2002), the court held that for a nonprovisonal application to be afforded the priority date of the provisional application, "the specification of the provisional must 'contain a written description of the invention and the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms,' 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶1, to enable an ordinarily skilled artisan to practice the invention claimed in the nonprovisional application."
In New Railhead, the patented drill bit was the subject of a commercial offer for sale. A provisional application was filed after the sale offer, but well within the one year grace period of 35 U.S.C. 102(b). A nonprovisional application, which issued as Patent No. 5,899,283, was filed within one year of the filing of the provisional application but more than one year after the sale offer. If the '283 patent was not afforded the priority date of the provisional application, the patent would be invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) since it was filed more than one year after the commercial offer for sale. The court looked at claim 1 of the '283 patent which recites a bit body being angled with respect to the sonde housing. The court then reviewed the provisional application and concluded that nowhere in the provisional application is the bit body expressly described as "being angled with respect to the sonde housing" as recited in claim 1 of the '283 patent. The court held that the disclosure of the provisional application does not adequately support the invention claimed in the '283 patent as to the angle limitation and therefore, the '283 patent is not entitled to the filing date of the provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e)(1) and the '283 patent is invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(b).
A claim is not required in a provisional application. However, for a claim in a later filed nonprovisional application to be entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the provisional application, the written description and drawing(s) (if any) of the provisional application must adequately support and enable the subject matter of the claim in the later filed nonprovisional application. If a claim in the nonprovisional application is not adequately supported by the written description and drawing(s) (if any) of the provisional application (as in New Railhead), that claim in the nonprovisional application is not entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the provisional application. If the filing date of the earlier provisional application is necessary, for example, in the case of an interference or to overcome a reference, care must be taken to ensure that the disclosure filed as the provisional application adequately provides (1) a written description of the subject matter of the claim(s) at issue in the later filed nonprovisional application, and (2) an enabling disclosure to permit one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the claimed invention in the later filed nonprovisional application without undue experimentation.
II. COPENDENCY
Copendency is defined in the clause which requires that the later-filed application must be filed before (1) the patenting, or (2) the abandonment of, or (3) the termination of proceedings in the prior application. With respect to provisional applications, Public Law 106-113 amended 35 U.S.C. 119(e)(2) to eliminate the copendency requirement for a nonprovisional application claiming benefit of a provisional application. 35 U.S.C. 119(e)(2) as amended by Public Law 106-113 is effective as of November 29, 1999 and applies to any provisional applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 but has no effect on any patent which is the subject of litigation in an action commenced before November 29, 1999.
Use form paragraphs 2.09 and 2.11 to indicate copendency is required.
¶ 2.11 Application Must Be Copending With Parent
This application is claiming the benefit of a prior filed nonprovisional application under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c). Copendency between the current application and the prior application is required.
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph must be preceded by heading form paragraph 2.09.
2. Do not use this form paragraph for priority claims under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to provisional applications.
>Use form paragraphs 2.09 and 2.11.01 and to indicate that the later-filed application must be filed not later than 12 months after the filing date of the provisional application for which a benefit is sought.
¶ 2.11.01 Application Must Be Filed Within 12 Months From the Provisional Application
This application is claiming the benefit of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e). However, this application was not filed within twelve months from the filing date of the provisional application, and there is no indication of an intermediate nonprovisional application that is directly claiming the benefit of the provisional application and filed within 12 months of the filing date of the provisional application.
Note: If the day that is 12 months after the filing date of the provisional application falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday within the District of Columbia, the nonprovisional application claiming the benefit of the provisional application may be filed on that next succeeding business day.
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph must be preceded by heading form paragraph 2.09.
<If the prior application issues as a patent, it is sufficient for the later-filed application to be copending with it if the later-filed application is filed on the same date, or before the date that the patent issues on the prior application. Thus, the later-filed application may be filed under 37 CFR 1.53(b) while the prior >application< is still pending before the examiner, or is in issue, or even between the time the issue fee is paid and the patent issues. **>Patents usually< will be published within four weeks of payment of the issue fee. Applicants are encouraged to file any continuing applications no later than the date the issue fee is paid, to avoid issuance of the prior application before the continuing application is filed.
If the prior application is abandoned, the later-filed application must be filed before the abandonment in order for it to be copending with the prior application. The term "abandoned," refers to abandonment for failure to prosecute ( MPEP § 711.02), express abandonment ( MPEP § 711.01), and abandonment for failure to pay the issue fee ( 37 CFR 1.316).
The expression "termination of proceedings" includes the situations when an application is abandoned or when a patent has been issued, and hence this expression is the broadest of the three.
After a decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in which the rejection of all claims is affirmed, **>the proceeding is terminated when the mandate is issued by the Court.< There are several other situations in which proceedings are terminated as is explained in MPEP § 711.02(c).
When proceedings in an application are terminated, the application is treated in the same manner as an abandoned application, and the term "abandoned application" may be used broadly to include such applications.
The term "continuity" is used to express the relationship of copendency of the same subject matter in two different applications of the same inventor. The later-filed application may be referred to as a continuing application when the prior application is not a provisional application. Continuing applications include those applications which are called divisions, continuations, and continuations-in-part. The statute is so worded that the prior application may contain more than the later-filed application, or the later-filed application may contain more than the prior application, and in either case the later-filed application is entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the prior application as to the common subject matter.
A later-filed application which is not copending with the prior application (which includes those called "substitute" applications as set forth in MPEP § 201.09) is not entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the prior application. Therefore, prior art against the claims of the later-filed application is determined based on the filing date of the later-filed application. An applicant is not required to refer to such prior application(s) in an application data sheet or in the specification of the later-filed application, but is required to otherwise call the examiner's attention to the prior application if it or its contents or prosecution is material to patentability of the later-filed application as defined in 37 CFR 1.56(b).
III. REFERENCE TO PRIOR APPLICATION(S)
The third requirement of the statute is that the later-filed application must contain a specific reference to the prior application. This should appear as the first sentence of the specification following the title preferably as a separate paragraph ( 37 CFR 1.78(a)) and/or in an application data sheet ( 37 CFR 1.76). If the specific reference is only contained in the application data sheet, then the benefit claim information will be included on the front page of any patent or patent application publication, but will not be included in the first sentence of the specification. When a benefit claim is submitted after the filing of an application, the reference to the prior application cannot include an incorporation by reference statement of the prior application>, unless an incorporation by reference statement of the prior application was presented upon filing of the application<. See Dart Indus. v. Banner, 636 F.2d 684, 207 USPQ 273 (C.A.D.C. 1980).
A. Reference to Prior Nonprovisional Applications
Except for benefit claims to the prior application in a continued prosecution application (CPA), benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, and 365(c) must identify the prior application by application number, or by international application number and international filing date, and indicate the relationship between the applications. The relationship between the applications is whether the instant application is a continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part of the prior nonprovisional application. An example of a proper benefit claim is "this application is a continuation of prior Application No. ---, filed ---." A benefit claim that merely states that "this application claims the benefit of Application No. ---, filed ---" does not comply with 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(i), since the relationship between the applications is not stated. In addition, a benefit claim that merely states that "this application is a continuing application of Application No. ---, filed ---" does not comply with 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(i) since the proper relationship, which includes the type of continuing (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) application, is not stated.
A request for a CPA filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d) is itself the specific reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) to every application assigned the same application number identified in the request. (Note: The CPA is assigned the same application number as the prior application.) In a CPA, a specific reference in the first sentence of the specification following the title, or in an application data sheet, to a prior application assigned the same application number is not required and may not be made. Any such reference *>should< be deleted. No amendment in a CPA may delete the specific reference to the prior application assigned the same application number. A specific reference to an application not assigned the same application number, but relied on for benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) is required. Cross references to other related applications not assigned the same application as the CPA may be made when appropriate.
When a nonprovisional application (other than a CPA) is entitled under 35 U.S.C. 120 to an earlier U.S. effective filing date, a statement such as "This is a divisional (>or< continuation, >or< continuation-in-part>, as appropriate<) application of Application No. ---, filed ---" should appear as the first sentence of the description or in an application data sheet, except in the case of design applications where it should appear as set forth in MPEP § 1504.20. In the case of an application filed under 37 CFR 1.53(b) as a divisional, continuation or continuation-in-part of a CPA, there should be only one reference to the series of applications assigned the same application number, with the filing date cited being that of the original noncontinued application. Where a nonprovisional application is claiming the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 of a prior national stage application under 35 U.S.C. 371, a suitable reference would read "This application is a continuation of U.S. Application No. 08/---, ** which was the National Stage of International Application No. PCT/DE95/---, filed ---."
Any benefit claim that does not both identify a prior application by its application number and specify a relationship between the applications will not be considered to contain a specific reference to a prior application as required by 35 U.S.C. 120. Such benefit claim may not be recognized by the Office and may not be included on the filing receipt even if the claim appears in the first sentence of the specification or an application data sheet. As a result, publication of the application may not be scheduled as a function of the prior application's filing date. If the Office does not recognize a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 because it does not contain the required reference and the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) for submitting the required reference has expired, applicant must submit a petition under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3) and the surcharge set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(t) in order for the Office to accept the unintentionally delayed claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 since the application will not have been scheduled for publication on the basis of the prior application's filing date.
To specify the relationship between the applications, applicant must specify whether the application is a continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part of the prior application. Note that the terms are exclusive. An application cannot be, for example, both a continuation and a divisional or a continuation and a continuation-in-part of the same application. Moreover, if the benefit of more than one nonprovisional application is claimed, then the relationship between each application (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) must be specified in order to establish copendency throughout the entire chain of prior-filed applications. For example, a statement that "this application claims the benefit of Application Nos. C, B, and A" or "this application is a continuing application of Application Nos. C, B, and A" is improper. Applicant instead must state, for example, that "this application is a continuation of Application No. C, filed ---, which is a continuation of Application No. B, filed ---, which is a continuation of Application No. A, filed ---.
B. Reference to Prior Provisional Applications
When the nonprovisional application is entitled to an earlier U.S. effective filing date of one or more provisional applications under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), a statement such as "This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/---, filed ---, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/ ---, filed ---." should appear as the first sentence of the description or in an application data sheet. In addition, for an application which is claiming the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 of a prior application, which in turn claims the benefit of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), a suitable reference would read, "This application is a continuation of U.S. Application No. 08/---, filed ---, now abandoned, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/---, filed ---."" Status of nonprovisional parent applications (whether it is patented or abandoned) should also be included. If a parent application has become a patent, the expression, "Patent No. _ _ " should follow the filing date of the parent application. If a parent application has become abandoned, the expression "abandoned" should follow the filing date of the parent application. In the case of design applications, it should appear as set forth in MPEP § 1504.20.
The relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) is not required and should not be specified when a prior provisional application is being claimed under 35 U.S.C. 119(e). No relationship should be specified because whenever a priority claim to a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) is made, it is implicit that the relationship is "nonprovisional application of a provisional application." If a relationship between a prior provisional application and the nonprovisional application is submitted, it may be unclear whether the applicant wishes to claim the benefit of the filing date of the provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120. Thus, applicants seeking to claim the priority to a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) should not state that the application is a "continuation" of a provisional application or that the application claims 35 U.S.C. 120 benefit to a provisional application. Although 35 U.S.C. 120 does not preclude a benefit claim to a provisional application, it is not recommended that applicants claim the benefit to a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 120 since such a claim could have the effect of reducing the patent term, as the term of a patent issuing from such an application may be measured from the filing date of the provisional application pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(a)(2).
C. Benefit Claims to Multiple Prior Applications
Sometimes a pending application is one of a series of applications wherein the pending application is not copending with the first filed application but is copending with an intermediate application entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the first application. If applicant wishes that the pending application have the benefit of the filing date of the first filed application, applicant must, besides making reference to the intermediate application, also make reference to the first application. See Sticker Indus. Supply Corp. v. Blaw-Knox Co., 405 F.2d 90, 160 USPQ 177 (7th Cir. 1968) and Hovlid v. Asari, 305 F. 2d 747, 134 USPQ 162 (9th Cir. 1962). The reference to the prior applications must identify all of the prior applications and indicate the relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) between each nonprovisional application in order to establish copendency throughout the entire chain of prior applications. Appropriate references must be made in each intermediate application in the chain of prior applications. If an applicant desires, for example, the following benefit claim: "this application is a continuation of Application No. C, filed ---, which is a continuation of Application No. B, filed ---, which claims the benefit of provisional Application No. A, filed ---," then Application No. C must have a reference to Application No. B and provisional Application No. A, and Application No. B must have a reference to provisional Application No. A.
There is no limit to the number of prior applications through which a chain of copendency may be traced to obtain the benefit of the filing date of the earliest of a chain of prior copending applications. See In re Henriksen, 399 F2.d 253, 158 USPQ 224 (CCPA 1968).
A nonprovisional application that directly claims the benefit of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) must be filed within 12 months from the filing date of the provisional application. Although an application that itself directly claims the benefit of a provisional application is not required to specify the relationship to the provisional application, if the instant nonprovisional application is not filed within the 12 month period, but claims the benefit of an intermediate nonprovisional application under 35 U.S.C. 120 that was filed within 12 months from the filing date of the provisional application and claimed the benefit of the provisional application, the intermediate application must be clearly identified as claiming the benefit of the provisional application so that the Office can determine whether the intermediate nonprovisional application was filed within 12 months of the provisional application and thus, whether the claim is proper. Applicant must state, for example, "this application is a continuation of Application No. C, filed ---, which is a continuation of Application No. B, filed ---, which claims the benefit of provisional Application No. A, filed ---." A benefit claim that merely states "this application claims the benefit of nonprovisional Application Nos. C and B, and provisional Application No. A" would be improper. Where the benefit of more than one provisional application is being claimed, the intermediate nonprovisional application(s) claiming the benefit of each provisional application must be indicated. Applicant must state, for example, "this application is continuation of Application No. D, filed ---, which is a continuation-in-part of Application No. C, filed ---, Application No. D claims the benefit of provisional Application No. B, filed ---, and Application No. C claims the benefit of provisional Application No. A, filed ---." If a benefit claim to a provisional application is submitted without an indication that an intermediate application directly claims the benefit of the provisional application and the instant nonprovisional application is not filed within the 12 month period or the relationship between each nonprovisional application is not indicated, the Office will not recognize such benefit claim and will not include the benefit claim on the filing receipt. Therefore, a petition under 37 CFR 1.78(a) and the surcharge set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(t) will be required if the intermediate application and the relationship of each nonprovisional application are not indicated within the period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a).
D. Reference Must Be Included in the Specification or an Application Data Sheet (ADS)
The reference required by 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) must be included in an ADS or the specification must contain or be amended to contain such reference in the first sentence following the title. If an applicant includes a benefit claim in the application but not in the manner specified by 37 CFR 1.78(a) (e.g., if the claim is included in an oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter) within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a), the Office will not require a petition under 37 CFR 1.78(a) and the surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t) to correct the claim if the information concerning the claim was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on the filing receipt. If, however, a claim is not included in the first sentence of the specification or in an ADS and is not recognized by the Office as shown by its absence on the filing receipt, the Office will require a petition under 37 CFR 1.78(a) and the surcharge to correct the claim. The Office may not recognize any benefit claim where there is no indication of the relationship between the nonprovisional applications or no indication of the intermediate nonprovisional application that is directly claiming the benefit of the provisional application. Even if the Office has recognized a benefit claim by entering it into the Office's database and including it on applicant's filing receipt, the benefit claim is not a proper benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78 unless the reference is included in an ADS or in the first sentence of the specification and all other requirements are met.
E. Examiners Should Require the Reference if Missing
In view of this requirement, the right to rely on a prior application may be waived or refused by an applicant by refraining from inserting a reference to the prior application in the specification of the later one. If the examiner is aware of the fact that an application is a continuing application of a prior one, he or she should merely call attention to this in an Office action by using the wording of form paragraphs 2.15 or 2.16.
**>¶ 2.15 Reference to Prior Application,
35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120 BenefitIf applicant desires priority under 35 U.S.C. [1] based upon a previously filed application, specific reference to the earlier filed application must be made in the instant application. For benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121 or 365(c), the reference must include the relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) of the applications. This should appear as the first sentence of the specification following the title, preferably as a separate paragraph unless it appears in an application data sheet. The status of nonprovisional parent application(s) (whether patented or abandoned) should also be included. If a parent application has become a patent, the expression "now Patent No. _____" should follow the filing date of the parent application. If a parent application has become abandoned, the expression "now abandoned" should follow the filing date of the parent application.
If the application is a utility or plant application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) on or after November 29, 2000, the specific reference must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. If the application is a utility or plant application which entered the national stage from an international application filed on or after November 29, 2000, after compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, the specific reference must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f) or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(5)(ii). This time period is not extendable and a failure to submit the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and/or 120, where applicable, within this time period is considered a waiver of any benefit of such prior application(s) under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c). A priority claim filed after the required time period may be accepted if it is accompanied by a grantable petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c). The petition must be accompanied by (1) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) to the prior application (unless previously submitted), (2) a surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t), and (3) a statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) and the date the claim was filed was unintentional. The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional. The petition should be addressed to: Mail Stop Petition, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450.
Examiner Note
1. In bracket 1, insert --119(e)-- or --120--.
2. In a continued prosecution application (CPA) filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d), a specific reference in the first sentence of the specification, or in an application data sheet, to the prior application is not required and may not be made. The specific reference requirement of 35 U.S.C. 120 is met by the transmittal request for the CPA which is considered to be part of the CPA. 37 CFR 1.53(d)(2)(iv) and (d)(7).
¶ 2.16 Reference to a Prior Application
It is noted that this application appears to claim subject matter disclosed in prior Application No. [1], filed [2]. A reference to the prior application must be inserted as the first sentence of the specification of this application or in an application data sheet ( 37 CFR 1.76), if applicant intends to rely on the filing date of the prior application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120. See 37 CFR 1.78(a). For benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 120, the reference must include the relationship (i.e., continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part) of all nonprovisional applications. Also, the current status of all nonprovisional parent applications referenced should be included.
If the application is a utility or plant application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) on or after November 29, 2000, the specific reference to the prior application must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. If the application is a utility or plant application which entered the national stage from an international application filed on or after November 29, 2000, after compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, the specific reference must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f) or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(5)(ii). This time period is not extendable and a failure to submit the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and/or 120, where applicable, within this time period is considered a waiver of any benefit of such prior application(s) under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c). A priority claim filed after the required time period may be accepted if it is accompanied by a grantable petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c). The petition must be accompanied by (1) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) to the prior application (unless previously submitted), (2) a surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t), and (3) a statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) and the date the claim was filed was unintentional. The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional. The petition should be addressed to: Mail Stop Petition, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450.
Examiner Note
In a continued prosecution application (CPA) filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d), a specific reference in the first sentence of the specification, or in an application data sheet, to the prior application is not required and may not be made. The specific reference requirement of 35 U.S.C. 120 is met by the transmittal request for the CPA which is considered to be part of the CPA. 37 CFR 1.53(d)(2)(iv) and (d)(7).
<If the examiner is aware of a prior application he or she should note it in an Office action, as indicated above, but should not require the applicant to call attention to the prior application.
In an application filed under former 37 CFR 1.60 applicant, in the amendment canceling the nonelected claims, should include directions to enter "This is a divisional (continuation) of application No. .........., filed ...................." as the first sentence. Where the applicant has inadvertently failed to do this the wording of form paragraph 2.17 should be used. Where the application filed under former 37 CFR 1.60 is otherwise ready for allowance, the examiner should insert the quoted sentence by examiner's amendment.
Applications are sometimes filed with a division, continuation, or continuation-in-part oath or declaration, in which the oath or declaration refers back to a prior application. If there is no reference in the specification of an application filed under former 37 CFR 1.60, in such cases, the examiner should merely call attention to this fact in his or her Office action, utilizing the wording of form paragraph 2.17.
¶ 2.17 Reference in Continuation/Divisional Applications Under Former 37 CFR 1.60
This application filed under former 37 CFR 1.60 lacks the necessary reference to the prior application. A statement reading "This is a [1] of Application No. [2], filed [3]." should be entered following the title of the invention or as the first sentence of the specification. Also, the current status of all nonprovisional parent applications referenced should be included.
Examiner Note
1. In bracket 1, insert either --division-- or --continuation--.
2. Use only in former 37 CFR 1.60 applications. For File Wrapper Continuing applications under former 37 CFR 1.62, use form paragraph 2.24.
3. Do not use if the prior application is a provisional application.
4. Do not use if the application is a continued prosecution application (CPA) filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d).
>Form paragraph may be used to remind applicant to insert parent application data in an application filed under former 37 CFR 1.62.
¶ 2.28 Reference in Former 37 CFR 1.62 Continuing Applications
This application filed under former 37 CFR 1.62 lacks the necessary reference to the prior application. A statement reading "This is a [1] of Application No. [2], filed [3]." should be entered following the title of the invention or as the first sentence of the specification. Also, the current status of the nonprovisional parent application(s) should be included.
Examiner Note
1. In bracket 1, insert --division--, --continuation--, or --continuation-in-part--.
2. Use only in "file wrapper continuing" applications under former 37 CFR 1.62.
<Where the applicant has inadvertently failed to make a reference to the parent application in an application filed under former 37 CFR 1.60 or 1.62 which is otherwise ready for issue, the examiner should insert the required reference by a formal examiner's amendment.
For notations to be placed on the file wrapper in the case of continuing applications, see MPEP § 202.02 and § 1302.09.
F. Correcting or Adding a Benefit Claim After Filing
The Office will not grant a request for a corrected filing receipt to include a benefit claim unless the proper reference to the prior application is included in the first sentence of the specification or an ADS within the time period required by 37 CFR 1.78(a). If the proper reference was previously submitted, a copy of the amendment, the first page of the specification, or the ADS containing the benefit claim should be included with the request for a corrected filing receipt. The Office plans to notify applicants on or with the filing receipt that a benefit claim may not have been recognized because the benefit claim was improper but applicants are advised that only the benefit claims that are listed on the filing receipt have been recognized by the Office. Therefore, applicants should carefully and promptly review their filing receipts in order to avoid the need for a petition ( 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3) or (a)((6)) and the surcharge.
If a benefit claim is added after the time period required by 37 CFR 1.78(a), a petition and the surcharge are required. See subsection V. "TIME PERIOD FOR MAKING A CLAIM FOR BENEFIT 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) AND (a)(5)." Any petition under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3) or (a)(*>6<) must be accompanied by an amendment to the specification or an ADS unless the proper reference was previously submitted. >In addition to the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 and the amendment or ADS, to add a benefit claim it may be necessary for applicant to file one of the following, depending on the status of the application:
(A) a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114, if the application is under a final rejection or has been allowed (see MPEP §706.07(h)). An amendment or ADS filed after final rejection or allowance is not entered as a matter of right and must be filed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.116 or 1.312, respectively; or
(B) a reissue application or a request for a certificate of correction under 37 CFR 1.323, if appropriate (see MPEP §§ 1402 and 1481), if the application has issued as a patent.<
An incorporation by reference statement added after an application's filing date is not effective because no new matter can be added to an application after its filing date (see 35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If an incorporation by reference statement is included in an amendment to the specification to add a benefit claim after the filing date of the application, the amendment would not be proper. When a benefit claim is submitted after the filing of an application, the reference to the prior application cannot include an incorporation by reference statement of the prior application>unless an incorporation by reference statement of the prior application was presented upon filing of the application<. See Dart Indus. v. Banner, 636 F.2d 684, 207 USPQ 273 (C.A.D.C. 1980).
G. Deleting Benefit Claims
Effective June 8, 1995, Public Law 103-465 amended 35 U.S.C. 154 to change the term of a patent to 20 years measured from the filing date of the earliest U.S. application for which benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is claimed. The 20-year patent term applies to all utility and plant patents issued on applications filed on or after June 8, 1995. As a result of the 20-year patent term, it is expected, in certain circumstances, that applicants may cancel their claim to priority by amending the specification or submitting a new application data sheet (no supplemental declaration is necessary) to delete any references to prior applications.
The examiner should consider whether any new prior art may now be available if a benefit claim is deleted. If an applicant is submitting an amendment to the specification or an ADS to delete a benefit claim after final rejection or action, the amendment or ADS will be treated under 37 CFR 1.116 (see MPEP § 714.12 and § 714.13). If the amendment or ADS to delete a benefit claim is submitted after the application has been allowed, the amendment or ADS will be treated under 37 CFR 1.312 (see MPEP § 714.16). A deletion of a benefit claim will not delay the publication of the application unless the amendment or ADS is recognized by the Office within nine weeks prior to the projected publication date that was originally calculated based on the benefit claim.
A cancelation of a benefit claim to a prior application may be considered as a showing that the applicant is intentionally waiving the benefit claim to the prior application in the instant application. If the applicant later files a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim to add the benefit claim to the prior application in the same application from which the benefit claim was canceled, the Office may refuse to accept such benefit claim because the delay was not unintentional.
In a continued prosecution application (CPA) filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d), no amendment may delete the specific reference to a prior application assigned the same application number. (Note: In the CPA, the request is the specific reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) to every application assigned the same application number identified in the request. Further, in a CPA, a specific reference in the first sentence of the specification following the title, or in an application data sheet, to a prior application assigned the same application number is not required and should not be made.) Upon entry of the amendment, the examiner must return the application to the Office of Initial Patent Examination (OIPE), accompanied by a completed OIPE Data Base Routing Slip, for correction of the file wrapper label and for updating the PALM data base. >For Image File Wrapper (IFW) processing, see the IFW Manual.< For 09/ or later series applications, it will not be necessary to forward the application to OIPE for correction of the parent application data in PALM. The correction or entry of the data in the PALM data base can be made by technical support staff of the TC. Upon entry of the data, a new PALM bib-data sheet should be printed and placed in the file *. See also MPEP § 707.05 and § 1302.09.
IV. SAME INVENTOR OR INVENTORS
The statute also requires that the applications claiming benefit of the earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120 be filed by an inventor or inventors named in the previously filed application or provisional application.
V. TIME PERIOD FOR MAKING A CLAIM FOR BENEFIT >UNDER<
37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) AND (a)(5)The time period requirement under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) and (a)(5) is only applicable to utility or plant applications filed on or after November 29, 2000.
The American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 (AIPA), Public Law 106-113, amended 35 U.S.C. 119 and 120 to provide that the Office may set a time period for the filing of benefit claims and establish procedures to accept an unintentionally delayed benefit claim. The Office has implemented these statutory changes, in part, by amending 37 CFR 1.78 to include: (A) a time period within which a benefit claim to a prior nonprovisional or provisional application must be stated or it is considered waived; and (B) provisions for the acceptance of the unintentionally delayed submission of a claim to the benefit of a prior nonprovisional or provisional application.
If the application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) on or after November 29, 2000, the benefit claim of the prior application must be made during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. **>If the application is a nonprovisional application which entered the national stage from an international application after compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, the benefit claim must be made within the later of: (1) four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under 37 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f); or (2) sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application.< See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(5)(ii). This time period is not extendable and a failure to submit the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and/or 120, where applicable, within this time period is considered a waiver of any benefit of such prior application(s) under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 and 365(c).
If the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) is not submitted within the required time period, a petition for an unintentionally delayed claim may be filed. The petition must be accompanied by: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) to the prior application (unless previously submitted); (B) a surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t); and (C) a statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) and the date the claim was filed was unintentional. The *>Director< may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3).
Likewise, if the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5) is not submitted within the required time period, a petition for an unintentionally delayed claim may be filed. The petition for an unintentionally delayed benefit claim must be submitted during the pendency of the nonprovisional application. The petition must be accompanied by: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5) to the prior provisional application (unless previously submitted); (B) a surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t); and (C) a statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5) and the date the claim was filed was unintentional. The *>Director< may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(6).
Petitions for an unintentionally delayed benefit claim should be forwarded to the Office of Petitions. See MPEP § 1002.02(b).
If a benefit claim is filed after the required time period and without a petition as required by 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3) or (a)(6), the applicant should be informed that the benefit claim was not entered and that a petition needs to be filed using form paragraph 2.39.
**>¶ 2.39
35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121 or 365(c) Benefit Claim is UntimelyThe benefit claim filed on [1] was not entered because the required reference was not timely filed within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5). If the application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) on or after November 29, 2000, the reference to the prior application must be submitted during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. If the application is a nonprovisional application which entered the national stage from an international application filed on or after November 29, 2000, after compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, the reference to the prior application must be made during the pendency of the application and within the later of four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f) or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior application. See 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) and (a)(5)(ii). If applicant desires priority under 35 U.S.C. [2] based upon a previously filed application, applicant must file a petition for an unintentionally delayed benefit claim under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3) or (a)(6). The petition must be accompanied by: (1) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) to the prior application (unless previously submitted); (2) a surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t); and (3) a statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2) or (a)(5) and the date the claim was filed was unintentional. The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional. The petition should be addressed to: Mail Stop Petition, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450.
Examiner Note
1. Use this form paragraph only for utility or plant applications filed on or after November 29, 2000.
2. In bracket 1, insert the filing date of the amendment or paper containing the benefit claim.
3. In bracket 2, insert --119(e)--, --120--, --121--, or --365(c)--.
<If an applicant includes a claim to the benefit of a prior application elsewhere in the application but not in the manner specified in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(iii) or 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5)(i) and (a)(5)(iii) (e.g., if the benefit claim is included in an unexecuted oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter) within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(ii) or (a)(5)(ii), the Office will not require a petition and the surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t) to correct the benefit claim if the information concerning the benefit claim contained elsewhere in the application was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on a filing receipt. This is because the application will have been scheduled for publication on the basis of such information concerning the benefit claim. Applicant must still submit the benefit claim in the manner specified in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(iii) or 37 CFR 1.78(a)(5)(i) and (a)(5)(iii) (i.e., by an amendment in the first sentence of the specification or in an ADS) to have a proper claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the benefit of a prior application. If, however, an applicant includes a benefit claim elsewhere in the application and not in the manner specified in 37 CFR 1.78(a), and the claim is not recognized by the Office as shown by its absence on a filing receipt (e.g., if the benefit claim is in a part of the application where benefit claims are not conventionally located, such as the body of the specification), the Office will require a petition and the surcharge under 37 CFR 1.17(t) to correct the benefit claim. This is because the application will not have been scheduled for publication on the basis of the information concerning the benefit claim contained elsewhere in the application.
VI. WHEN NOT ENTITLED TO BENEFIT >OF< EARLIER * FILING DATE
Where the prior application (a nonprovisional application) is found to be fatally defective because of insufficient disclosure to support allowable claims, a later-filed application filed as a "continuation-in-part" of the first application to supply the deficiency is not entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the first application. Hunt Co. v. Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, 177 F.2d 583, 587, 83 USPQ 277, 281 (2d Cir. 1949) and cases cited therein.
Any claim in a continuation-in-part application which is directed solely to subject matter adequately disclosed under 35 U.S.C. 112 in the parent nonprovisional application is entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the parent nonprovisional application. However, if a claim in a continuation-in-part application recites a feature which was not disclosed or adequately supported by a proper disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 112 in the parent nonprovisional application, but which was first introduced or adequately supported in the continuation-in-part application such a claim is entitled only to the filing date of the continuation-in-part application; In re Chu, 66 F.3d 292, 36 USPQ2d 1089 (Fed. Cir. 1995); Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994); In re Von Lagenhoven, 458 F.2d 132, 136, 173 USPQ 426, 429 (CCPA 1972); and Chromalloy American Corp. v. Alloy Surfaces Co., Inc., 339 F. Supp. 859, 874, 173 USPQ 295, 306 (D. Del. 1972).
By way of further illustration, if the claims of a continuation-in-part application which are only entitled to the continuation-in-part filing date, "read on" such published, publicly used or sold, or patented subject matter (e.g., as in a genus- species relationship) a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 would be proper. Cases of interest in this regard are as follows: Mendenhall v. Cedarapids Inc., 5 F.3d 1557, 28 USPQ2d 1081 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Lukach, 442 F.2d 967, 169 USPQ 795 (CCPA 1971); In re Hafner, 410 F.2d 1403, 161 USPQ 783 (CCPA 1969); In re Ruscetta, 255 F.2d 687, 118 USPQ 101 (CCPA 1958); In re Steenbock, 83 F.2d 912, 30 USPQ 45 (CCPA 1936); Ex parte Hageman, 179 USPQ 747 (Bd. App. 1971).
Go to MPEP - Table of Contents