Continuation in Part vs. Divisional Application

Attribute	Continuation in Part	Divisional Application
Parent Application	Shares priority with parent application	Shares priority with parent application
Claims	May include new subject matter not present in parent application	Claims must be directed to distinct inventions
Filing Date	Filed during pendency of parent application	Filed after parent application is granted
Examination	Examined separately from parent application	Examined separately from parent application

Introduction

When it comes to patent applications, there are various strategies that applicants can use to protect their inventions. Two common strategies are Continuation in Part (CIP) and Divisional Applications. Both of these strategies have their own unique attributes and advantages. In this article, we will compare the attributes of Continuation in Part and Divisional Application to help applicants understand which strategy may be best suited for their specific situation.

Definition

A Continuation in Part application is a type of patent application that is filed during the pendency of a parent application. It allows the applicant to add new subject matter that was not included in the original application. This new subject matter is treated as if it was filed on the same day as the parent application. On the other hand, a Divisional Application is filed when the original application contains more than one invention. The applicant can divide the original application into multiple divisional applications, each covering a separate invention.

Scope of Protection

One of the key differences between Continuation in Part and Divisional Applications is the scope of protection that they offer. In a Continuation in Part application, the new subject matter added to the application is treated as if it was filed on the same day as the parent application. This means that the applicant can benefit from the priority date of the parent application for the new subject matter. On the other hand, in a Divisional Application, each divisional application is treated as a separate application with its own priority date. This allows the applicant to pursue protection for multiple inventions separately.

Cost and Timing

Another important factor to consider when choosing between Continuation in Part and Divisional Applications is the cost and timing involved. Continuation in Part applications are typically less expensive to file compared to Divisional Applications. This is because Continuation in Part applications do not require a new filing fee, as the application is filed during the pendency of the parent application. On the other hand, Divisional Applications require a new filing fee for each divisional application filed. In terms of timing, Continuation in Part applications can be filed at any time during the pendency of the parent application, while Divisional Applications must be filed before the parent application is granted.

Prosecution Strategy

When it comes to prosecution strategy, Continuation in Part and Divisional Applications offer different advantages. Continuation in Part applications allow the applicant to pursue additional claims or subject matter that was not included in the original application. This can be useful if the applicant wants to explore different aspects of the invention or cover variations of the invention. On the other hand, Divisional Applications allow the applicant to pursue protection for multiple inventions separately. This can be beneficial if the examiner raises objections to one invention but not another, allowing the applicant to pursue protection for the unaffected invention.

Final Thoughts

In conclusion, both Continuation in Part and Divisional Applications offer unique advantages and attributes that can be beneficial for patent applicants. The choice between the two strategies will depend on the specific needs and goals of the applicant. Continuation in Part applications are useful for adding new subject matter to an existing application, while Divisional Applications are useful for pursuing protection for multiple inventions separately. By understanding the differences between Continuation in Part and Divisional Applications, applicants can make informed decisions about which strategy is best suited for their specific situation.