diff --git a/test/bytecode_3.5_run/01_loop_if_continue.pyc b/test/bytecode_3.5_run/01_loop_if_continue.pyc
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..f699a244
Binary files /dev/null and b/test/bytecode_3.5_run/01_loop_if_continue.pyc differ
diff --git a/test/simple_source/bug35/01_loop_if_continue.py b/test/simple_source/bug35/01_loop_if_continue.py
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c6e57b92
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/simple_source/bug35/01_loop_if_continue.py
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+# From 3.6.4 pathlib.py
+# Bug was handling "continue" as last statement of "if"
+# RUNNABLE!
+def parse_parts(it, parts):
+    for part in it:
+        if not part:
+            continue
+        parts = 1
+    return parts
+
+assert parse_parts([], 5) == 5
+assert parse_parts([True], 6) == 1
+assert parse_parts([False], 6) == 6
diff --git a/uncompyle6/parsers/parse35.py b/uncompyle6/parsers/parse35.py
index 3e2a1fa6..5358d464 100644
--- a/uncompyle6/parsers/parse35.py
+++ b/uncompyle6/parsers/parse35.py
@@ -111,6 +111,12 @@ class Python35Parser(Python34Parser):
         jump_absolute_else ::= jb_else
         jump_absolute_else ::= CONTINUE ELSE
 
+        # Our hacky "ELSE" determination doesn't do a good job and really
+        # determine the start of an "else". It could also be the end of an
+        # "if-then" which ends in a "continue". Perhaps with real control-flow
+        # analysis we'll sort this out. Or call "ELSE" something more appropriate.
+        _ifstmts_jump ::= c_stmts_opt ELSE
+
         # ifstmt ::= testexpr c_stmts_opt
 
         iflaststmt ::= testexpr c_stmts_opt JUMP_FORWARD