@b.geraldini I would not recommend this situation. Seems you may be equating “validity” with “legality” and that I do not have specific advice as I am not a lawyer nor do I know what the laws would be in your state/country.  Seems there would be some loopholes in the process of splitting out these envelopes.  As an example, on envelope 2, what stops you from adding in new fields or adding in a rider document that are Signed by that Recipient on Envelope 2 but not by Recipient 1 since this is a copied document uploaded to a new envelope.  I would say stick with a single envelope, the appropriate document with DocuSign fields and the full workflow of Recipients in the envelope.  

Hi b.geraldini!

No, this is not valid, especially because during the download and upload procedure, this document could suffer some changes and the “first recipient” would never know about it. Also, it’s important to remember that the Certificate of Completion will only show the information about the recipients that participate in that signature flow.
So, I strong recommend you to include all recipients in the same envelope (signature flow).

Hi, David, You're correct. Validity = Legality. 

Sure, the best case scenario is clear to me. However, I need to get more details regarding the preservation of the Hash in a flow like that. If the Hash from the first envelope will be preserved meaning that the second envelope will have the same number or if it will change considering that the document has changed after it was done on the first signature.

Hi, Vinicius, Perfect, the flow is clear to me I'm just trying to understand in a more technical way this scenario if it happens someday.

My opinion is the same as you and the previous comment, by doing that the validity of the first signature is voided, but I need to understand it in a more technical way.

Getting a little more technical, if you download any signed document directly from the DocuSign platform, you will see that there is an Entrust signing security seal added to the PDF, which guarantees the integrity of the document and which exactly mentions the envelope ID for that transaction.

Assuming you use this signed PDF file and create a new envelope with other people signing, a new envelopeID will be generated by DocuSign, also generating another certificate of completion.
If in the future you require a certificate of completion of "version 2" of the signed document, you will see that not everyone who signed was part of the flow, so, depending on the country's legislation, the document will not be accepted.

Hi b.geraldini!

No, this is not valid, especially because during the download and upload procedure, this document could suffer some changes and the “first recipient” would never know about it. Also, it’s important to remember that the Certificate of Completion will only show the information about the recipients that participate in that signature flow.
So, I strong recommend you to include all recipients in the same envelope (signature flow).

Hi, Vinicius, Perfect, the flow is clear to me I'm just trying to understand in a more technical way this scenario if it happens someday.

My opinion is the same as you and the previous comment, by doing that the validity of the first signature is voided, but I need to understand it in a more technical way.

Getting a little more technical, if you download any signed document directly from the DocuSign platform, you will see that there is an Entrust signing security seal added to the PDF, which guarantees the integrity of the document and which exactly mentions the envelope ID for that transaction.

Assuming you use this signed PDF file and create a new envelope with other people signing, a new envelopeID will be generated by DocuSign, also generating another certificate of completion.
If in the future you require a certificate of completion of "version 2" of the signed document, you will see that not everyone who signed was part of the flow, so, depending on the country's legislation, the document will not be accepted.

Thanks, Vinicius, that's exactly my point, so the Second envelope will “overwrite” the certificates of the first one preserving only the hash and the certificate of the the First one.

Exactly, the second signed PDF will only contain the signing security seal with the information of the second transaction, making no mention of the seal on the previous envelope.