This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.
No, a provisional application should not be referred to as a ‘continuation’. The MPEP clearly states:
“An application claiming the benefit of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) should not be called a ‘continuation’ of the provisional application.”
This is because provisional applications serve a different purpose than continuation applications. Provisional applications are temporary placeholders that establish a priority date but do not mature into issued patents. Continuations, on the other hand, are full patent applications that build upon previously filed non-provisional applications.
For more information on 35 U.S.C. 119(e), visit: 35 U.S.C. 119(e).
For more information on patent law, visit: patent law.
For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.