Inventor files new patent improving his own work in recently issued patent; uses novel new components and some existing components, can prove advantages.

In the original patent issued inventor used prior art to differentiate novelty

If Inventor leaves out prior art section in new application does he put the information in his Information Disclosure Statement concerning his own previous work and the previous prior art; or does Information Disclosure cover the prior art without mention ?

Also; my current new claims use the identical format of the original successful patent claims except of course new names for all the new components

What language is needed acknowledging the reuse of existing components in the claims?

could you give an example what it look like?

  • I feel that if you can have design patent go for it and will have all essential feature earlier requested and improvements. or in case you want a utility patent you should go for CIP, to avoid obviousness related queries from own application. you may to file terminal disclaimer later on.
    – Pushpak
    Dec 16, 2014 at 6:06

4 Answers 4


Since the first patent has issued it is too late to get priority from it, file a continuation or a CIP.

You can file a new application and optionally mention the first application in a background section. It definitely needs to be on the IDS along with everything in the previous IDS and everything brought up by the examiner in the previous prosecution.


Has inventor claimed priority from the recently issued patent?

If yes, then the earlier issued patent will not be prior art for the new application. If the priority is not claimed, then the earlier issued patent and other relevant prior art documents would be considered as prior art against the new application.


If it is not too late, and if the new claims fit into the existing background (i.e., you have all of the necessary definitions), you may be able to file a continuation patent. There is a related question that discusses this in detail.


The inventor could file a continuation-in-part application on the new invention. A continuation-in-part is a type of continuation application, but one where the new invention is not disclosed in the parent application and not claimed in the parent. (A simple continuation must be both disclosed in the parent and claimed in the parent.)

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .