What are the implications of claiming benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c)?

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based)BlueIron Update: 2024-09-09

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.

Claiming benefit under these statutes allows an application to receive the earlier filing date of a prior-filed application, which can be crucial for establishing priority and overcoming prior art. However, this claim also requires that the application does not contain new matter.

The MPEP ¶ 2.10.01 states:

“This form paragraph should be used when an application, which claims the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) contains new matter relative to the prior-filed application, and purports to be a ‘continuation,’ ‘division,’ or ‘divisional application’ of the prior-filed application.”

If new matter is found, the applicant may need to change the application type or remove the benefit claim to maintain the new subject matter.

For more information on 35 U.S.C. 120, visit: 35 U.S.C. 120.

For more information on 35 U.S.C. 365(c), visit: 35 U.S.C. 365(c).

For more information on 35 U.S.C. 386(c), visit: 35 U.S.C. 386(c).

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

Topics: MPEP 200 - Types and Status of Application; Benefit and Priority MPEP 211 - Claiming the Benefit of an Earlier Filing Date Under 35 U.S.C. 120 and 119(e) Patent Law Patent Procedure
Tags: Chain Of Copendency, Filing Before Abandonment, Ida Mandatory Elements, Priority Benefit, sir waiver