`
`United States Court of Appeals
`for the Federal Circuit
`______________________
`
`DIRTT ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS LTD,
`Appellant
`
`v.
`
`ALLSTEEL INC.,
`Appellee
`______________________
`
`2017-1797
`______________________
`
`Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2015-
`01691.
`
`______________________
`
`Decided: July 23, 2018
`______________________
`
`CHAD EDWARD NYDEGGER, Workman Nydegger, Salt
`Lake City, UT, argued for appellant. Also represented by
`MICHAEL J. FRODSHAM, DAVID R. TODD.
`
` R. TREVOR CARTER, Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, Indi-
`anapolis, IN, argued for appellee. Also represented by
`NICHOLAS M. ANDERSON, VICTOR P. JONAS, TIMOTHY M.
`SULLIVAN, Minneapolis, MN; JOEL SAYRES, Denver, CO.
` ______________________
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`DIRTT ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS v. ALLSTEEL INC.
`
`Before O’MALLEY, CLEVENGER, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.
`O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge.
`DIRTT Environmental Solutions, Ltd. appeals from a
`final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal
`Board (“Board”) in an inter-partes review proceeding,
`finding that Allsteel Inc. (“Allsteel”) had shown by a
`preponderance of the evidence that claims 1, 4–7, 9, 10,
`14–20, and 25 of U.S. Patent No. 8,024,901 are unpatent-
`able under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Allsteel Inc. v. DIRTT Envtl.
`Sols. Ltd., No. IPR2015-01691, 2017 WL 379367 (P.T.A.B.
`Jan. 19, 2017). Because the Board’s final written decision
`addresses fewer than all claims challenged in Allsteel’s
`petition to institute inter-partes review, and the parties
`have not waived their objections to the Board’s failure to
`address the non-instituted claims, we vacate and remand
`to allow the Board to issue a final written decision con-
`sistent with SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348
`(2018).
`
`VACATED AND REMANDED
`COSTS
`
`No costs.
`
`