Comment Re:Filed After Bluetooth 2.0 Was Released (Score 2) 126
This is kind of what I figured. There should be some strict limitations on this behavior. Using it for one year to hone your patent application? Fine. Using it for over a decade to make sure your patent applies to technology developed after your initial patent filing? Not good at all. Perhaps there should be a hard limit of one year between priority date and filing date.
It's already covered. When you file a continuation-in-part, the only claims that get the benefit of the earlier priority date are ones that were fully described in the initial application. Anything that wasn't described there doesn't get that priority date, and you only get the later date. So, for example, if I file a patent application that describes a peanut butter and jelly sandwich on 1/1/2000, I can later file a continuation in part application on 1/1/2010 (provided the original is still pending) that adds using cinnamon raisin toast as the bread. If that later application has a patent claim of:
1. A sandwich, comprising:
a first slice of bread;
peanut butter adjacent to the first slice of bread;
jelly adjacent to the peanut butter; and
a second slice of bread adjacent to the jelly.
That would get a priority date of 1/1/2000 for searching for prior art. If I have a second claim of:
2. The sandwich of claim 1, wherein the first slice of bread and second slice of bread are each cinnamon raisin toast.
That would only get a priority date of 1/1/2010.
So, it's even better than your suggestion - you don't even get a single day to hone your patent application. Anything new you add gets a later date.