Thought process of a patent attorney regarding continuing applications: 2

Definition of a continuation application:

A "continuation application" is a patent application filed by an applicant who wants to pursue additional claims to an invention disclosed in an earlier application of the applicant (the "parent" application) that has not yet been issued or abandoned. The continuation uses the same specification as the pending parent application, claims the priority based on the filing date of the parent, and must name at least one of the inventors named in the parent application. This type of application is useful when a patent examiner allowed some, but rejected other claims in an application, or where an applicant may not have exhausted all useful ways of claiming different embodiments of the invention.  

During the prosecution of a continuation application, the applicant may not add additional disclosure to the specification. If the inventor needs to supplement the disclosure of the earlier parent application, he has to file a continuation-in-part application. Definition courtesy: Wikipedia

Definition of a continuation-in-part application:  

A "continuation-in-part" application ("CIP" or "CIP application") is one in which the applicant adds subject matter not disclosed in the parent, but repeats substantial portion of the parent's specification, and shares at least one inventor with the parent application. The CIP application is a convenient way to claim enhancements developed after the parent application was filed. It is the successor to the earlier "additional improvement" patents mentioned above. For a continuation-in-part application, claims to subject matter that was also disclosed in the parent are entitled to the parent’s priority date, while claims to the additional subject matter are only entitled to the filing date of the CIP application.  Definition courtesy: Wikipedia  

An example:

Typically, people use smart phones for Internet based features like Facebook, twitter, and social internetworks. Nevertheless, usage of banking sites, travel sites, and shopping sites is also seen in smart phone usage. However, a lot of users avoid smart phones because of limited preferences of Internet usage; these users are seen using simple keypad phones; these phones have a limited memory for message storage; if an entity is sending important messages to a simple keypad phone; mostly there is no system in an automated system of the entity to second failed sending of messages with an email or a telephone call; the user may be using a simple phone because of limited Internet usage preferences. So, a simple phone is still in the market & need for a continuing patent application may still exist.     

Thank you