In light of our decision in In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed.Cir. 2008) (en banc), we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment that these claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Dr. Classen’s claims are neither “tied to a particular machine or apparatus” nor do they “transforme ] a particular article into a different state or thing.” Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.