What are the advantages of filing a CPA instead of a regular continuation application?

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.

Filing a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) for design patents has several advantages over filing a regular continuation application under 37 CFR 1.53(b):

• Minimal filing requirements – only a request on a separate paper and the filing fee are needed
• No new oath or declaration is required
• Faster processing – the CPA uses the file and contents of the prior application
• Potentially faster examination – CPAs are often treated as “amended” applications for examination priority
• No need for a new specification or drawings

The MPEP notes: “A CPA has a number of advantages compared to a continuation or divisional application filed under 37 CFR 1.53(b). For example, the papers required to be filed in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in order to secure a filing date under 37 CFR 1.53(d) are minimal compared to 37 CFR 1.53(b).”

For more information on continuation applications, visit: continuation applications.

For more information on design patents, visit: design patents.

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