Patent Law FAQ

The need for a new assignment in applications derived from earlier applications depends on the type of application and its content:

• Division and Continuation Applications: Generally, no new assignment is required as the prior assignment is automatically applied. However, a new recordation request is needed to reflect this in USPTO records.
• Substitute and Continuation-in-Part Applications: New assignments are typically required unless the application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant.
• Applications Claiming Provisional Benefits: If the application includes only subject matter from the provisional application, no new assignment is needed. However, if it includes new subject matter, a new assignment is required, with the same exception as for substitute and continuation-in-part applications.

Always refer to MPEP § 306, § 307, and § 308 for the most up-to-date and detailed information.

For more information on new assignment, visit: new assignment.

For more information on USPTO requirements, visit: USPTO requirements.

A new assignment is generally required for a continuation-in-part (CIP) application, with one exception. According to MPEP 306:

Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This means:

• For CIP applications filed before September 16, 2012: A new assignment is always required.
• For CIP applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: A new assignment is required unless the assignee is the original applicant in the CIP application.

The reason for this requirement is that CIP applications often contain new subject matter not present in the original application, and the original assignment may not cover this new material.

September 16, 2012, is a significant date in patent application assignments, particularly for applications claiming the benefit of a provisional application. The MPEP states:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This date marks a change in assignment requirements. For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, if the assignee is the original applicant, new assignment papers may not be necessary even if the application includes subject matter not common with the provisional application. This change aligns with broader reforms introduced by the America Invents Act (AIA) that came into effect on that date.

35 U.S.C. 119(e) is crucial in understanding the relationship between provisional applications and their non-provisional counterparts, particularly in terms of assignments. The MPEP § 306.01 states:

If an application which claims the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) includes only subject matter which formed a part of the provisional application, an assignment recorded against the provisional application will be effective in the later application, similar to the practice with respect to continuations and divisions filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

This means:

• 35 U.S.C. 119(e) allows non-provisional applications to claim the benefit of an earlier filing date from a provisional application.
• When a non-provisional application claims this benefit and contains only subject matter from the provisional, the assignment recorded for the provisional application remains effective for the non-provisional.
• This treatment aligns with how assignments are handled for continuations and divisions under 35 U.S.C. 120.

However, if new subject matter is introduced in the non-provisional application, different assignment rules may apply, as detailed in other parts of MPEP § 306.01.

The key difference in assignment between division/continuation applications and substitute/continuation-in-part (CIP) applications lies in how prior assignments are applied:

• Division/Continuation Applications: Prior assignments recorded against the original application automatically apply to these applications. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a division or continuation application, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is applied (effective) to the division or continuation application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.
• Substitute/CIP Applications: Prior assignments do not automatically apply. MPEP 306 states: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This difference is due to the nature of these application types. Division and continuation applications contain only subject matter from the original application, while substitute and CIP applications may contain new subject matter not present in the original application.

The assignment rules for substitute and continuation-in-part applications differ from those for division and continuation applications. As per the MPEP, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This means that for substitute or continuation-in-part applications, a new assignment must be recorded if they are to be issued to an assignee. However, there’s an exception: unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

For more detailed information, refer to MPEP § 307 and MPEP § 308.

For more information on continuation-in-part application, visit: continuation-in-part application.

For more information on patent assignment, visit: patent assignment.

For more information on substitute application, visit: substitute application.

While a prior assignment recorded against an original application is automatically effective for division and continuation applications, the USPTO does not automatically update its assignment records for these new applications. As stated in MPEP 306:

Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

This means that even though the assignment is legally effective, the USPTO’s records won’t show it unless the assignee takes specific action. To ensure the USPTO’s records are up to date, assignees should:

• File a request for recordation of the assignment for the new application
• Ensure the request complies with 37 CFR 3.28
• Pay the required fee as specified in 37 CFR 3.41

The assignment process for continuations-in-part (CIPs) differs from other application types due to the potential inclusion of new subject matter. The MPEP § 306.01 explains:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein. This is similar to the practice with respect to continuations-in-part filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

In essence:

• For continuations and divisions that contain only subject matter from the parent application, the original assignment usually remains effective.
• For CIPs or applications with new subject matter not in the parent or provisional application, new assignment papers are typically required, with the exception noted for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, where the assignee is the original applicant.

This difference reflects the unique nature of CIPs, which introduce new matter not present in the parent application.

For division and continuation applications, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is automatically applied to the new application. This is because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.

However, it’s important to note that while the assignment is effective for the new application, the USPTO’s assignment records will not automatically reflect this. As stated in the MPEP: Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

Yes, substitute and continuation-in-part (CIP) applications generally require new assignments. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

However, there is an exception for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

The need for a new assignment in applications derived from earlier applications depends on the type of application and its content:

• Division and Continuation Applications: Generally, no new assignment is required as the prior assignment is automatically applied. However, a new recordation request is needed to reflect this in USPTO records.
• Substitute and Continuation-in-Part Applications: New assignments are typically required unless the application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant.
• Applications Claiming Provisional Benefits: If the application includes only subject matter from the provisional application, no new assignment is needed. However, if it includes new subject matter, a new assignment is required, with the same exception as for substitute and continuation-in-part applications.

Always refer to MPEP § 306, § 307, and § 308 for the most up-to-date and detailed information.

For more information on new assignment, visit: new assignment.

For more information on USPTO requirements, visit: USPTO requirements.

A new assignment is generally required for a continuation-in-part (CIP) application, with one exception. According to MPEP 306:

Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This means:

• For CIP applications filed before September 16, 2012: A new assignment is always required.
• For CIP applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: A new assignment is required unless the assignee is the original applicant in the CIP application.

The reason for this requirement is that CIP applications often contain new subject matter not present in the original application, and the original assignment may not cover this new material.

September 16, 2012, is a significant date in patent application assignments, particularly for applications claiming the benefit of a provisional application. The MPEP states:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This date marks a change in assignment requirements. For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, if the assignee is the original applicant, new assignment papers may not be necessary even if the application includes subject matter not common with the provisional application. This change aligns with broader reforms introduced by the America Invents Act (AIA) that came into effect on that date.

35 U.S.C. 119(e) is crucial in understanding the relationship between provisional applications and their non-provisional counterparts, particularly in terms of assignments. The MPEP § 306.01 states:

If an application which claims the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) includes only subject matter which formed a part of the provisional application, an assignment recorded against the provisional application will be effective in the later application, similar to the practice with respect to continuations and divisions filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

This means:

• 35 U.S.C. 119(e) allows non-provisional applications to claim the benefit of an earlier filing date from a provisional application.
• When a non-provisional application claims this benefit and contains only subject matter from the provisional, the assignment recorded for the provisional application remains effective for the non-provisional.
• This treatment aligns with how assignments are handled for continuations and divisions under 35 U.S.C. 120.

However, if new subject matter is introduced in the non-provisional application, different assignment rules may apply, as detailed in other parts of MPEP § 306.01.

The key difference in assignment between division/continuation applications and substitute/continuation-in-part (CIP) applications lies in how prior assignments are applied:

• Division/Continuation Applications: Prior assignments recorded against the original application automatically apply to these applications. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a division or continuation application, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is applied (effective) to the division or continuation application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.
• Substitute/CIP Applications: Prior assignments do not automatically apply. MPEP 306 states: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This difference is due to the nature of these application types. Division and continuation applications contain only subject matter from the original application, while substitute and CIP applications may contain new subject matter not present in the original application.

The assignment rules for substitute and continuation-in-part applications differ from those for division and continuation applications. As per the MPEP, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This means that for substitute or continuation-in-part applications, a new assignment must be recorded if they are to be issued to an assignee. However, there’s an exception: unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

For more detailed information, refer to MPEP § 307 and MPEP § 308.

For more information on continuation-in-part application, visit: continuation-in-part application.

For more information on patent assignment, visit: patent assignment.

For more information on substitute application, visit: substitute application.

While a prior assignment recorded against an original application is automatically effective for division and continuation applications, the USPTO does not automatically update its assignment records for these new applications. As stated in MPEP 306:

Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

This means that even though the assignment is legally effective, the USPTO’s records won’t show it unless the assignee takes specific action. To ensure the USPTO’s records are up to date, assignees should:

• File a request for recordation of the assignment for the new application
• Ensure the request complies with 37 CFR 3.28
• Pay the required fee as specified in 37 CFR 3.41

The assignment process for continuations-in-part (CIPs) differs from other application types due to the potential inclusion of new subject matter. The MPEP § 306.01 explains:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein. This is similar to the practice with respect to continuations-in-part filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

In essence:

• For continuations and divisions that contain only subject matter from the parent application, the original assignment usually remains effective.
• For CIPs or applications with new subject matter not in the parent or provisional application, new assignment papers are typically required, with the exception noted for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, where the assignee is the original applicant.

This difference reflects the unique nature of CIPs, which introduce new matter not present in the parent application.

For division and continuation applications, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is automatically applied to the new application. This is because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.

However, it’s important to note that while the assignment is effective for the new application, the USPTO’s assignment records will not automatically reflect this. As stated in the MPEP: Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

Yes, substitute and continuation-in-part (CIP) applications generally require new assignments. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

However, there is an exception for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

The need for a new assignment in applications derived from earlier applications depends on the type of application and its content:

• Division and Continuation Applications: Generally, no new assignment is required as the prior assignment is automatically applied. However, a new recordation request is needed to reflect this in USPTO records.
• Substitute and Continuation-in-Part Applications: New assignments are typically required unless the application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant.
• Applications Claiming Provisional Benefits: If the application includes only subject matter from the provisional application, no new assignment is needed. However, if it includes new subject matter, a new assignment is required, with the same exception as for substitute and continuation-in-part applications.

Always refer to MPEP § 306, § 307, and § 308 for the most up-to-date and detailed information.

For more information on new assignment, visit: new assignment.

For more information on USPTO requirements, visit: USPTO requirements.

A new assignment is generally required for a continuation-in-part (CIP) application, with one exception. According to MPEP 306:

Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This means:

• For CIP applications filed before September 16, 2012: A new assignment is always required.
• For CIP applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: A new assignment is required unless the assignee is the original applicant in the CIP application.

The reason for this requirement is that CIP applications often contain new subject matter not present in the original application, and the original assignment may not cover this new material.

September 16, 2012, is a significant date in patent application assignments, particularly for applications claiming the benefit of a provisional application. The MPEP states:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This date marks a change in assignment requirements. For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, if the assignee is the original applicant, new assignment papers may not be necessary even if the application includes subject matter not common with the provisional application. This change aligns with broader reforms introduced by the America Invents Act (AIA) that came into effect on that date.

35 U.S.C. 119(e) is crucial in understanding the relationship between provisional applications and their non-provisional counterparts, particularly in terms of assignments. The MPEP § 306.01 states:

If an application which claims the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) includes only subject matter which formed a part of the provisional application, an assignment recorded against the provisional application will be effective in the later application, similar to the practice with respect to continuations and divisions filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

This means:

• 35 U.S.C. 119(e) allows non-provisional applications to claim the benefit of an earlier filing date from a provisional application.
• When a non-provisional application claims this benefit and contains only subject matter from the provisional, the assignment recorded for the provisional application remains effective for the non-provisional.
• This treatment aligns with how assignments are handled for continuations and divisions under 35 U.S.C. 120.

However, if new subject matter is introduced in the non-provisional application, different assignment rules may apply, as detailed in other parts of MPEP § 306.01.

The key difference in assignment between division/continuation applications and substitute/continuation-in-part (CIP) applications lies in how prior assignments are applied:

• Division/Continuation Applications: Prior assignments recorded against the original application automatically apply to these applications. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a division or continuation application, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is applied (effective) to the division or continuation application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.
• Substitute/CIP Applications: Prior assignments do not automatically apply. MPEP 306 states: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This difference is due to the nature of these application types. Division and continuation applications contain only subject matter from the original application, while substitute and CIP applications may contain new subject matter not present in the original application.

The assignment rules for substitute and continuation-in-part applications differ from those for division and continuation applications. As per the MPEP, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This means that for substitute or continuation-in-part applications, a new assignment must be recorded if they are to be issued to an assignee. However, there’s an exception: unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

For more detailed information, refer to MPEP § 307 and MPEP § 308.

For more information on continuation-in-part application, visit: continuation-in-part application.

For more information on patent assignment, visit: patent assignment.

For more information on substitute application, visit: substitute application.

While a prior assignment recorded against an original application is automatically effective for division and continuation applications, the USPTO does not automatically update its assignment records for these new applications. As stated in MPEP 306:

Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

This means that even though the assignment is legally effective, the USPTO’s records won’t show it unless the assignee takes specific action. To ensure the USPTO’s records are up to date, assignees should:

• File a request for recordation of the assignment for the new application
• Ensure the request complies with 37 CFR 3.28
• Pay the required fee as specified in 37 CFR 3.41

The assignment process for continuations-in-part (CIPs) differs from other application types due to the potential inclusion of new subject matter. The MPEP § 306.01 explains:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein. This is similar to the practice with respect to continuations-in-part filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

In essence:

• For continuations and divisions that contain only subject matter from the parent application, the original assignment usually remains effective.
• For CIPs or applications with new subject matter not in the parent or provisional application, new assignment papers are typically required, with the exception noted for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, where the assignee is the original applicant.

This difference reflects the unique nature of CIPs, which introduce new matter not present in the parent application.

For division and continuation applications, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is automatically applied to the new application. This is because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.

However, it’s important to note that while the assignment is effective for the new application, the USPTO’s assignment records will not automatically reflect this. As stated in the MPEP: Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

Yes, substitute and continuation-in-part (CIP) applications generally require new assignments. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

However, there is an exception for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

The need for a new assignment in applications derived from earlier applications depends on the type of application and its content:

• Division and Continuation Applications: Generally, no new assignment is required as the prior assignment is automatically applied. However, a new recordation request is needed to reflect this in USPTO records.
• Substitute and Continuation-in-Part Applications: New assignments are typically required unless the application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant.
• Applications Claiming Provisional Benefits: If the application includes only subject matter from the provisional application, no new assignment is needed. However, if it includes new subject matter, a new assignment is required, with the same exception as for substitute and continuation-in-part applications.

Always refer to MPEP § 306, § 307, and § 308 for the most up-to-date and detailed information.

For more information on new assignment, visit: new assignment.

For more information on USPTO requirements, visit: USPTO requirements.

A new assignment is generally required for a continuation-in-part (CIP) application, with one exception. According to MPEP 306:

Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This means:

• For CIP applications filed before September 16, 2012: A new assignment is always required.
• For CIP applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: A new assignment is required unless the assignee is the original applicant in the CIP application.

The reason for this requirement is that CIP applications often contain new subject matter not present in the original application, and the original assignment may not cover this new material.

September 16, 2012, is a significant date in patent application assignments, particularly for applications claiming the benefit of a provisional application. The MPEP states:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This date marks a change in assignment requirements. For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, if the assignee is the original applicant, new assignment papers may not be necessary even if the application includes subject matter not common with the provisional application. This change aligns with broader reforms introduced by the America Invents Act (AIA) that came into effect on that date.

35 U.S.C. 119(e) is crucial in understanding the relationship between provisional applications and their non-provisional counterparts, particularly in terms of assignments. The MPEP § 306.01 states:

If an application which claims the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) includes only subject matter which formed a part of the provisional application, an assignment recorded against the provisional application will be effective in the later application, similar to the practice with respect to continuations and divisions filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

This means:

• 35 U.S.C. 119(e) allows non-provisional applications to claim the benefit of an earlier filing date from a provisional application.
• When a non-provisional application claims this benefit and contains only subject matter from the provisional, the assignment recorded for the provisional application remains effective for the non-provisional.
• This treatment aligns with how assignments are handled for continuations and divisions under 35 U.S.C. 120.

However, if new subject matter is introduced in the non-provisional application, different assignment rules may apply, as detailed in other parts of MPEP § 306.01.

The key difference in assignment between division/continuation applications and substitute/continuation-in-part (CIP) applications lies in how prior assignments are applied:

• Division/Continuation Applications: Prior assignments recorded against the original application automatically apply to these applications. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a division or continuation application, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is applied (effective) to the division or continuation application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.
• Substitute/CIP Applications: Prior assignments do not automatically apply. MPEP 306 states: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This difference is due to the nature of these application types. Division and continuation applications contain only subject matter from the original application, while substitute and CIP applications may contain new subject matter not present in the original application.

The assignment rules for substitute and continuation-in-part applications differ from those for division and continuation applications. As per the MPEP, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This means that for substitute or continuation-in-part applications, a new assignment must be recorded if they are to be issued to an assignee. However, there’s an exception: unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

For more detailed information, refer to MPEP § 307 and MPEP § 308.

For more information on continuation-in-part application, visit: continuation-in-part application.

For more information on patent assignment, visit: patent assignment.

For more information on substitute application, visit: substitute application.

While a prior assignment recorded against an original application is automatically effective for division and continuation applications, the USPTO does not automatically update its assignment records for these new applications. As stated in MPEP 306:

Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

This means that even though the assignment is legally effective, the USPTO’s records won’t show it unless the assignee takes specific action. To ensure the USPTO’s records are up to date, assignees should:

• File a request for recordation of the assignment for the new application
• Ensure the request complies with 37 CFR 3.28
• Pay the required fee as specified in 37 CFR 3.41

The assignment process for continuations-in-part (CIPs) differs from other application types due to the potential inclusion of new subject matter. The MPEP § 306.01 explains:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein. This is similar to the practice with respect to continuations-in-part filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

In essence:

• For continuations and divisions that contain only subject matter from the parent application, the original assignment usually remains effective.
• For CIPs or applications with new subject matter not in the parent or provisional application, new assignment papers are typically required, with the exception noted for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, where the assignee is the original applicant.

This difference reflects the unique nature of CIPs, which introduce new matter not present in the parent application.

For division and continuation applications, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is automatically applied to the new application. This is because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.

However, it’s important to note that while the assignment is effective for the new application, the USPTO’s assignment records will not automatically reflect this. As stated in the MPEP: Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

Yes, substitute and continuation-in-part (CIP) applications generally require new assignments. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

However, there is an exception for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

The need for a new assignment in applications derived from earlier applications depends on the type of application and its content:

• Division and Continuation Applications: Generally, no new assignment is required as the prior assignment is automatically applied. However, a new recordation request is needed to reflect this in USPTO records.
• Substitute and Continuation-in-Part Applications: New assignments are typically required unless the application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant.
• Applications Claiming Provisional Benefits: If the application includes only subject matter from the provisional application, no new assignment is needed. However, if it includes new subject matter, a new assignment is required, with the same exception as for substitute and continuation-in-part applications.

Always refer to MPEP § 306, § 307, and § 308 for the most up-to-date and detailed information.

For more information on new assignment, visit: new assignment.

For more information on USPTO requirements, visit: USPTO requirements.

A new assignment is generally required for a continuation-in-part (CIP) application, with one exception. According to MPEP 306:

Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This means:

• For CIP applications filed before September 16, 2012: A new assignment is always required.
• For CIP applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: A new assignment is required unless the assignee is the original applicant in the CIP application.

The reason for this requirement is that CIP applications often contain new subject matter not present in the original application, and the original assignment may not cover this new material.

September 16, 2012, is a significant date in patent application assignments, particularly for applications claiming the benefit of a provisional application. The MPEP states:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

This date marks a change in assignment requirements. For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, if the assignee is the original applicant, new assignment papers may not be necessary even if the application includes subject matter not common with the provisional application. This change aligns with broader reforms introduced by the America Invents Act (AIA) that came into effect on that date.

35 U.S.C. 119(e) is crucial in understanding the relationship between provisional applications and their non-provisional counterparts, particularly in terms of assignments. The MPEP § 306.01 states:

If an application which claims the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) includes only subject matter which formed a part of the provisional application, an assignment recorded against the provisional application will be effective in the later application, similar to the practice with respect to continuations and divisions filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

This means:

• 35 U.S.C. 119(e) allows non-provisional applications to claim the benefit of an earlier filing date from a provisional application.
• When a non-provisional application claims this benefit and contains only subject matter from the provisional, the assignment recorded for the provisional application remains effective for the non-provisional.
• This treatment aligns with how assignments are handled for continuations and divisions under 35 U.S.C. 120.

However, if new subject matter is introduced in the non-provisional application, different assignment rules may apply, as detailed in other parts of MPEP § 306.01.

The key difference in assignment between division/continuation applications and substitute/continuation-in-part (CIP) applications lies in how prior assignments are applied:

• Division/Continuation Applications: Prior assignments recorded against the original application automatically apply to these applications. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a division or continuation application, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is applied (effective) to the division or continuation application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.
• Substitute/CIP Applications: Prior assignments do not automatically apply. MPEP 306 states: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This difference is due to the nature of these application types. Division and continuation applications contain only subject matter from the original application, while substitute and CIP applications may contain new subject matter not present in the original application.

The assignment rules for substitute and continuation-in-part applications differ from those for division and continuation applications. As per the MPEP, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

This means that for substitute or continuation-in-part applications, a new assignment must be recorded if they are to be issued to an assignee. However, there’s an exception: unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.

For more detailed information, refer to MPEP § 307 and MPEP § 308.

For more information on continuation-in-part application, visit: continuation-in-part application.

For more information on patent assignment, visit: patent assignment.

For more information on substitute application, visit: substitute application.

While a prior assignment recorded against an original application is automatically effective for division and continuation applications, the USPTO does not automatically update its assignment records for these new applications. As stated in MPEP 306:

Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

This means that even though the assignment is legally effective, the USPTO’s records won’t show it unless the assignee takes specific action. To ensure the USPTO’s records are up to date, assignees should:

• File a request for recordation of the assignment for the new application
• Ensure the request complies with 37 CFR 3.28
• Pay the required fee as specified in 37 CFR 3.41

The assignment process for continuations-in-part (CIPs) differs from other application types due to the potential inclusion of new subject matter. The MPEP § 306.01 explains:

If an application claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a provisional application includes subject matter that is not common with subject matter of the provisional application, new assignment papers must be recorded for the application claiming the benefit of the provisional application, unless the later application is filed on or after September 16, 2012 and the assignee is the original applicant therein. This is similar to the practice with respect to continuations-in-part filed under 35 U.S.C. 120.

In essence:

• For continuations and divisions that contain only subject matter from the parent application, the original assignment usually remains effective.
• For CIPs or applications with new subject matter not in the parent or provisional application, new assignment papers are typically required, with the exception noted for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, where the assignee is the original applicant.

This difference reflects the unique nature of CIPs, which introduce new matter not present in the parent application.

For division and continuation applications, a prior assignment recorded against the original application is automatically applied to the new application. This is because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to the subject matter common to both applications.

However, it’s important to note that while the assignment is effective for the new application, the USPTO’s assignment records will not automatically reflect this. As stated in the MPEP: Although the assignment recorded against an original application is applied to the division or continuation application, the Office’s assignment records will only reflect an assignment of a division or continuation application (or any other application) if a request for recordation in compliance with 37 CFR 3.28, accompanied by the required fee (37 CFR 3.41), is filed.

Yes, substitute and continuation-in-part (CIP) applications generally require new assignments. As stated in MPEP 306: In the case of a substitute or continuation-in-part application, a prior assignment of the original application is not applied (effective) to the substitute or continuation-in-part application because the assignment recorded against the original application gives the assignee rights to only the subject matter common to both applications.

However, there is an exception for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: Substitute or continuation-in-part applications require the recordation of a new assignment if they are to be issued to an assignee, unless the substitute or continuation-in-part application is filed on or after September 16, 2012, and the assignee is the original applicant therein.