Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 15/359,604

BILL PAYMENT INFRASTRUCTURE FOR BILL SPLITTEES

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Nov 22, 2016
Examiner
POE, KEVIN T
Art Unit
3692
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
BILLGO, INC.
OA Round
11 (Non-Final)
40%
Grant Probability
Moderate
11-12
OA Rounds
4y 6m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 40% of resolved cases
40%
Career Allow Rate
207 granted / 516 resolved
-11.9% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 6m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
568
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
§103
32.2%
-7.8% vs TC avg
§102
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§112
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 516 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to applicant's communication of December 17, 2025. The rejections are stated below. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/17/2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment/Arguments 3. Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 concerning 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the claims are "related to the management of an electronic network" and not directed to a method of organizing human activity. The claimed method’s core purpose is the organization of a fundamental financial or commercial activity such as collecting shares of a debt from multiple parties to pay a single bill. The claimed steps of obtaining billing information, assigning debt portions, and obtaining moneys from individuals to satisfy a shared obligation are activities within the realm of "fundamental economic principles or practices" and "commercial or legal interactions." The additional steps of determining transaction latencies based on funding source type, calculating different transaction times, and sending notifications based on those latencies constitute an automation of the mental process of coordinating payment timelines. Automating this coordination using a computer network does not change the underlying abstract nature of the concept. The claims are directed to the abstract idea of mitigating financial risk through coordinated timing of transactions, which is a fundamental economic practice. Applicant's characterization of the claims as "managing electronic transactions on an electronic network" merely describes the technological environment in which the abstract idea is implemented. The claims do not recite an improvement in the functioning of the network or computer technology itself. Instead, they use the electronic network and computer components as tools to execute the abstract coordination process. Therefore, the claims are directed to a patent-ineligible abstract idea. Regarding Applicant's alternative argument that the claims recite "significantly more," the additional elements, such as determining latencies, calculating times, storing money in a placeholder account, and sending notifications, are themselves routine data-gathering, calculation, and communication steps performed by the computer and electronic network. The ordered combination of these steps amounts to nothing more than linking the exception to a particular environment. The claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application that is necessarily rooted in computer technology to overcome a problem specifically arising in that realm. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 4. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of payment of bills without significantly more. The Examiner has identified independent system Claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis and is similar to independent Claims 9 and 15. Claim 1 is directed to a method which is one of the four statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES). Claim 1 recites a method that facilitates payment of bills, the method comprising: obtaining billing information regarding a bill from a biller, wherein a plurality of splittees of a group share an obligation to pay a debt associated with the bill; assigning a portion of the debt to each splittee, wherein a sum of the splittee's portions is sufficient to pay the debt associated with the bill; obtaining moneys from a funding source of each splittee, wherein the monies are obtained by performing a just-in-time pull transaction comprising: determining a first money source for a first splittee; determining a second money source for a second splittee; determining a … for the first money source and a … for the second money source, wherein the ... is longer than the …; determining a due date for the bill; providing, to the first splittee, a first notification of when a first portion of the bill must be funded by the first splittee, wherein the first notification is based at least upon the first transaction latency; wherein providing the first notification causes display of the first notification in a … on a …, and wherein the first notification is operable to receive a first approval via the …; providing, to the second splittee, a second notification of when a second portion of the bill must be funded by the second splittee, wherein the second notification is based at least upon the …; wherein providing the second notification causes display of the second notification in a … on a …, and wherein the … is operable to receive a second approval via the …; based upon the due date, calculating a first transaction time based upon the … and a second transaction time based upon the second transaction latency, wherein the first and second transaction time are different; upon reaching the first transaction time, obtaining moneys, via an …, from the first funding source; storing the moneys from the first funding source in a placeholder account; upon reaching the second transaction time, obtaining moneys, via the …, from the second funding source; and storing the moneys from the second funding source in the placeholder account; determining whether the obtained moneys for each splittee are in an amount that is sufficient to cover each splittee's assigned portion of the debt; in response to a determination that the obtained moneys for each splittee are sufficient, collecting the obtained moneys into a single payment that is sufficient to pay the debt associated with the bill; and transmitting the single payment to the biller. These limitations (with the exception of italicized limitations) describe an abstract idea of payment of bills to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (commercial or legal interactions including sales activities or business relations). Accordingly, the claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A: Prong 1: YES). 5. The claim also recites as additional elements such as “electronic network” and “just-in-time-pull” which do no more than implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, claim 1 recites an abstract idea without a practical application (Step 2A - Prong 2: NO). 6. Further, as the additional elements of claim 1 do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO). 7. Claims 9 and 15 also recite the abstract idea of payment of bills and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (commercial interactions or sales activities or behaviors, business relations, managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people) step one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04). Claim 9 includes the additional elements of “one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, direct the one or more processors to perform operations that facilitate a bill payment system”, “network”, and “just-in-time“. Claim 15 includes the additional elements of “one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, direct the one or more processors”, “network”, and “just-in-time”. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. There is no improvement to the functioning of a computer, or lo any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a}. 8. Claim 2 recites “further comprising: selecting a funding transaction type to obtain moneys for a particular splittee, wherein the particular splittee specifies that selected funding transaction type; obtaining a due date of the bill; determining that a transaction latency of the selected funding transaction type exceeds the due date of the bill; in response to the determination that the transaction latency of the selected funding transaction type exceeds the due date of the bill, notifying the particular splittee of that determination” which further defines the abstract idea. 9. Claim 3 recites “further comprising: obtaining a due date of the bill; determining that a transaction latency of a funding transaction type to obtain moneys for a particular splittee exceeds the due date of the bill; enabling a selection of funding transaction type other than the determined funding transaction type” which further defines the abstract idea. 10. Claim 4 recites “further comprising, in response to a determination that the obtained moneys for one of the splittees are insufficient, sending a notification that indicates that determination the splittee with insufficient funding” which further defines the abstract idea. 11. Claim 5 recites “further comprising, for a particular splittee: acquiring a prioritized listing of funding sources available for the particular splittee; selecting a highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action; in response to a determination that the obtained moneys for the particular splittee are insufficient, selecting a next highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action” which further defines the abstract idea. 12. Claim 6 recites “further comprising, with at least one of the splittees of the group, obtaining moneys from multiple funding sources” which further defines the abstract idea. 13. Claim 7 recites “further comprising, with at least one of the splittees of the group, obtaining moneys from multiple differing funding sources” which further defines the abstract idea. 14. Claim 8 recites “wherein the assigning the portions includes: sending a notification to the splittees regarding their assigned portion; receiving an approval from the splittees regarding their assigned portion” which further defines the abstract idea. 15. Claim 10 recites “wherein the assigning each splittee's portion includes a proportional allocation of the debt” which further defines the abstract idea. 16. Claim 11 recites “wherein the obtaining moneys for a particular splittee includes acquiring funding from a bank account associated with that particular splittee” which further defines the abstract idea. 17. Claim 12 recites “wherein the obtaining moneys for a particular splittee includes acquiring funding from a bank account associated with that particular splittee” which further defines the abstract idea. 18. Claim 13 recites “wherein the operations further comprise selecting a funding transaction type to obtain moneys for a particular splittee” which further defines the abstract idea. 19. Claim 14 recites “wherein the operations further comprise, for a particular splittee: acquiring a prioritized listing of funding sources available for the particular splittee; selecting a highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action wherein the operations further comprise, for a particular splittee: acquiring a prioritized listing of funding sources available for the particular splittee; selecting a highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action” which further defines the abstract idea. 20. Claim 16 recites “wherein the operations further comprise, for a particular splittee: acquiring a prioritized listing of funding sources available for the particular splittee; selecting a highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action” which further defines the abstract idea. 21. Claim 17 recites “wherein the operations further comprise, for a particular splittee: acquiring a prioritized listing of funding sources available for the particular splittee; selecting a highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action” which further defines the abstract idea. 22. Claim 18 recites “wherein the operations further comprise, for a particular splittee: acquiring a prioritized listing of funding sources available for the particular splittee; selecting a highest priority funding source on the listing from which to obtain the moneys for the obtaining moneys action” which further defines the abstract idea. 23. Claim 19 recites “obtaining a due date of the bill; determining that a transaction latency of a funding transaction type to obtain moneys for a particular splittee exceeds the due date of the bill; enabling a selection of funding transaction type other than the determined funding transaction type” which further defines the abstract idea. 24. Claim 20 recites “wherein the assigning the portions includes: receiving a notification regarding a splittee's assigned portion; sending an approval from the splittee regarding their assigned portion” which further defines the abstract idea. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T POE whose telephone number is (571)272-9789. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30am through 6pm EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan Donlon can be reached on 571-270-3602. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /K.T.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /KEVIN T POE/ /RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692 February 20, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 22, 2016
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2017
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 14, 2019
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Sep 11, 2019
Interview Requested
Oct 25, 2019
Response Filed
Nov 05, 2019
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 18, 2020
Final Rejection — §101
Jul 24, 2020
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 29, 2020
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 17, 2020
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Dec 02, 2020
Interview Requested
Dec 15, 2020
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 17, 2020
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 04, 2021
Response Filed
Mar 13, 2021
Final Rejection — §101
Jul 22, 2021
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 23, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 17, 2021
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Jun 27, 2022
Response Filed
Oct 26, 2022
Final Rejection — §101
May 08, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
May 16, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 06, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Dec 14, 2023
Response Filed
Dec 15, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 16, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 23, 2024
Final Rejection — §101
Oct 09, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 10, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §101
May 19, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
Dec 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12561686
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR OUTLIER DETECTION USING UNSUPERVISED MACHINE LEARNING MODELS TRAINED ON BALANCED DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12450652
PARAMETER-BASED COMPUTER EVALUATION OF USER ACCOUNTS BASED ON USER ACCOUNT DATA STORED IN ONE OR MORE DATABASES
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Patent 12412168
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR GENERATING CUSTOMIZED ELECTRONIC CHECKOUT USER INTERFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 09, 2025
Patent 12406267
SUPPLIER DATA VALIDATION USING VALIDATION SUBSYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 02, 2025
Patent 12067541
INTEGRATED ELECTRONIC DISBURSEMENT AND CASH FLOW MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 20, 2024
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

11-12
Expected OA Rounds
40%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+16.2%)
4y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 516 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month