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.
There is a significant difference in how Continued Prosecution Applications (CPAs) are treated for utility/plant applications versus design applications. According to the examiner’s note in MPEP ¶ 2.35:
If the request for a CPA in a utility or plant application is improper and the CPA has been treated as an RCE, do not use this form paragraph (use form paragraph 7.42.15 instead). See MPEP § 706.07(h).
This indicates that for utility or plant applications, an improper CPA request is treated as a Request for Continued Examination (RCE). However, for design applications, CPA requests are generally accepted and processed as described in MPEP ¶ 2.35. This distinction is important for applicants to understand when considering their continued prosecution options.
For more information on CPA, visit: CPA.
For more information on design patents, visit: design patents.
For more information on patent application types, visit: patent application types.
For more information on plant patents, visit: plant patents.
For more information on RCE, visit: RCE.
For more information on utility patents, visit: utility patents.