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.
A continuation-in-part (CIP) application and a provisional application are two distinct types of patent applications with different purposes and effects. The key difference is highlighted in MPEP ¶ 2.06, which states:
An application claiming the benefit of a provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) should not be called a ‘continuation-in-part’ of the provisional application.
This means that:
- A CIP application builds upon a prior non-provisional application, adding new disclosure while claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date for the shared content.
- A provisional application is a temporary placeholder that establishes a priority date but does not mature into a patent. It cannot be continued or have a CIP.
- Applications claiming benefit from a provisional application are typically filed as new non-provisional applications, not as CIPs.
For more information on 35 U.S.C. 119(e), visit: 35 U.S.C. 119(e).
For more information on patent application types, visit: patent application types.
For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.