Absent a different usage made clear by the specification, the term “indicative” is a common word with a well-known meaning of “serving to indicate” via “a sign, symptom, or index.” Here, for example, “data that is indicative of a gratuity to be charged” in a financial transaction was found to be sufficiently distinguished from data relating only to the total transaction amount, which may or may not include a gratuity, and which by itself provides no way of ascertaining the amount of gratuity in the total. “It would be inconsistent with the plain meaning of the term ‘indicative’ to conclude that a given value is ‘indicative’ of another value where an entirely separate set of information … is necessary to determine that other value.” This would be a good case to consult and cite in response to an overly broad interpretation of information that is claimed as “indicative” of a given value.
Background / Facts: The patent application on appeal here from rejection at the PTO is directed to a point-of-sale (POS) device that can be used by a merchant to complete an electronic transaction using a customer’s credit or other card. The claims at issue recite a transaction in which the card issuer sends back to the merchant (and ultimately the customer) “data that is indicative of a gratuity to be charged,” which is touted as advantageous over prior art processes requiring the customer to calculate a gratuity and then add the gratuity to the subtotal. The prior art discloses transmitting the total charge to the card issuer, who then transmits that information back to the merchant.
Issue(s): Whether the total charge information sent back from the card issuer in the prior art is “indicative” of a gratuity in the manner claimed because it can be compared to the original bill presumably in the customer’s possession to determine the gratuity amount.
Holding(s): No. “We hold that the Board erred in affirming the examiner’s rejection because it incorrectly construed ‘data that is indicative of a gratuity to be charged’ as a total value which may or may not include a gratuity and because there is no way from the data transmitted by the card issuer to ascertain the amount of the total that is indicative of the gratuity. ‘Indicative’ is a common word with a well-known meaning. ‘Indicative’ means ‘serving to indicate,’ and the PTO agrees that ‘indicate’ means ‘to be a sign, symptom, or index.’ [] It would be inconsistent with the plain meaning of the term ‘indicative’ to conclude that a given value is ‘indicative’ of another value where an entirely separate set of information, not transmitted by the card issuer, is necessary to determine that other value. [The applicant] used the term ‘indicative’ consistent with this plain meaning throughout the specification.”