Claiming Priority to Parent or Child Application: Does it Matter?

[af]

I received an issuance notification for a client's application. I have one continuation application claiming priority to this application. I now plan on filing a second continuation application. So I have a choice: write the new application and claim priority to the parent before it issues, or claim priority to the child.

Here is my question. Does anyone know if the PTO would possibly give higher priority in the examination queue if I claimed priority to the parent rather than the child?

Thanks,
Alan

[af]

Anyone??

[DogDayPM 9er9er9er]

I'd normally claim priority to both in a chain if it is a chain (i.e., if instead you had #1 already granted and thus had to claim priority from the still pending continuation).

But although I've filed 3 divisionals at once claiming priority to the same parent, I've never had a situation quite like yours where you're filing a second continuation with the original parent still pending.

I don't think it matters if you claim through both prior apps #1 and #2, but then again I don't know what benefit you would gain by including app #2 in the chain.  Assuming app#2 and proposed app#3 are direct continuations with no new matter.

Anyone else?

[af]

I found the answer.  I spoke with the SPE of the appropriate examination art unit in the USPTO. She said claiming to the parent or child does not affect examination priority.

[dab2d]

I would go to the parent. I just read somewhere that if the claim of priority chain is broken anywhere along the line, priority is lost for all children after that. Even if the children list the proper priority data.