## Facts

- Leachman Cattle of Colorado, LLC owned U.S. Patent No. 8,660,888 B2, directed to software-based methods for determining relative market value and ranking of groups of feeder cattle.
- American Simmental Association (ASA), a cattle-breed association using genetic evaluation tools, filed a post-grant review petition challenging all claims within nine months of issuance.
- The patent described industry use of genetic and performance-related information (including EPD/EBV-type data and economic weights) to compute a value and produce a “scorecard” ranking for a sale group of feeder calves.
- Prior industry tools included EBVs/EPDs and selection indices used primarily to compare and rank breeding animals (e.g., bulls) for breeding purposes, sometimes expressed as dollars per head.
- Leachman asserted its claimed advance was valuing and ranking actual sale groups of feeder cattle (a market valuation use), rather than ranking breeding animals.
- The PTAB instituted review, including a challenge under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
- During the proceeding, Leachman moved to amend by cancelling original claims and proposing substitute claims intended to cure defects.

## Issues

1. Whether the challenged claims are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 under the Alice/Mayo framework.
2. Whether proposed substitute claims in the motion to amend were patentable, including whether they recited patent-eligible subject matter under § 101.

## Decision

- The PTAB issued a final written decision holding all challenged original claims unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
- The PTAB found the claims directed to the abstract idea of valuing and ranking commercial goods (feeder cattle) using information and economic calculations.
- The PTAB found no inventive concept because the claims implemented the valuation/ranking idea with routine computer functions (data input, calculation, and output/display).
- The PTAB denied Leachman’s motion to amend because the proposed substitute claims remained directed to the same abstract valuation concept and still relied on generic computer implementation.

## Legal Principles

- Under Alice/Mayo step one, claims focused on economic valuation, pricing, or ranking of goods using information and mathematical relationships are generally directed to an abstract idea.
- Under Alice/Mayo step two, implementing an abstract idea using generic computer components and conventional data processing (receiving data, applying formulas, outputting results) does not supply an inventive concept.
- Novelty or asserted industry importance of a business/economic method does not, by itself, convert an abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter.
- In a post-grant review motion to amend, proposed substitute claims must satisfy statutory requirements and must themselves be patent-eligible; claims that retain the same abstract focus and conventional implementation remain unpatentable.

## Conclusion

The PTAB cancelled the ’888 patent’s challenged claims as ineligible under § 101 because they claimed an abstract method of computing and presenting relative market value rankings for feeder cattle using conventional computer processing, and it denied amended substitute claims for the same eligibility defect.


Am. Simmental Ass’n v. Leachman Cattle of Colo., LLC, No. PGR2015-00003 (P.T.A.B. 2016)