Which statements are true regarding Continued Prosecution Applications (CPA)?

The correct statement regarding Continued Prosecution Applications (CPA) is that CPAs can be filed after a parent application is granted. This mechanism allows applicants to continue the prosecution of claims that were previously examined in the parent application that has received a final rejection or has been allowed but has not yet issued as a patent or has been abandoned.

CPAs are specifically useful for applicants who may want to further refine their claims or address the issues raised during the examination process of the parent application while retaining the benefit of the original filing date. This effective practice aids in avoiding the potential loss of patent rights and helps in speeding up the examination process relative to filing a new application.

Regarding the other statements, while CPAs are a tool within the patent application system, they are specifically used in certain situations rather than with any type of application. CPAs can be filed in the context of utility applications and design applications, not just limited to design applications. Therefore, the notion that they are applicable only to design applications is inaccurate.

Also, the idea that CPAs allow for new filings within five years is not quite on target. While there are specific provisions concerning continuations and amendments within a certain timeframe, a CPA does not itself create a new filing within a timeline like five