US 11001037

I'll search the USPTO database and CAFC dockets for the specific patent number 11001037.

The initial searches confirmed the patent's identity via Google Patents and Justia, but the USPTO-specific and CAFC docket searches returned no results. Let me run additional targeted searches.

Based on my searches and the authoritative patent text provided, here is a concise summary of US patent 11001037 (US11001037B2).

---

US 11001037 B2 — Summary

Title: Composite pane having sun protection coating and thermal-radiation-reflecting coating

Assignee:

• Original assignee at filing: Saint-Gobain Glass France SAS (Courbevoie, FR)
• Current assignee (per Google Patents legal-event record): Saint-Gobain Sekurit France SAS, via a "nunc pro tunc assignment" recorded 2025-05-16 (effective 2025-05-05). Note: Google Patents flags assignee data as potentially inaccurate.

Inventors: Jan Hagen, Robert Besler, Valentin Schulz

Prosecution details:

• Application No.: US16/769,454 (U.S. National Stage of PCT/EP2018/078077)
• Filing date: 2018-10-15
• Priority date: 2017-12-05 (EP 17 205 439.7)
• Pre-grant publication: US20200384739A1 (2020-12-10)
• Issue date: 2021-05-11
• Legal status: Active; anticipated expiration 2038-10-15; 4th-year maintenance fee paid 2024-10-30

Abstract: A composite pane includes an outer pane having an outer-side surface and an interior-side surface, an inner pane having an outer-side surface and an interior-side surface, and a thermoplastic intermediate layer joining them. Between the panes is a sun protection coating that substantially reflects or absorbs rays outside the visible spectrum (notably IR). On the interior-side surface of the inner pane is a thermal-radiation-reflecting (low-E) coating. The pane has a transmittance index A of 0.02 to 0.08, where A = TL_composite glass pane / (TL_low-E-coated pane × TE), with TL (light transmittance) and TE (energy transmittance) measured per ISO 9050.

---

Independent Claims — Plain-Language Overview

The patent has 20 claims; the substantive independent claim is claim 1, with claim 15 as a separate use/method claim (it incorporates the pane of claim 1 by reference). Claims 2–14 and 16–20 are dependent.

Claim 1 (composite pane). A laminated glazing having:

1. an outer pane (outer-side and interior-side surfaces),
2. an inner pane (outer-side and interior-side surfaces),
3. a thermoplastic intermediate layer bonding the interior-side surface of the outer pane to the outer-side surface of the inner pane,
4. at least one sun protection coating between the panes that substantially reflects or absorbs radiation outside the visible spectrum (e.g., infrared),
5. a thermal-radiation-reflecting (low-E) coating on the interior-side surface of the inner pane, the coating containing a transparent conductive oxide (TCO),
6. overall light transmittance (TL) of 1% to 12%, and
7. a transmittance index A of 0.02 to 0.08, defined by A = TL_composite / (TL_low-E-coated pane × TE) per ISO 9050.

In plain terms: a vehicle-roof-style dark laminated glass that combines a solar-control (IR-reflecting) coating inside the laminate with a TCO-based low-emissivity coating on the cabin-facing surface, tuned via a dimensionless transmittance index so that the interior-side reflection stays low while total solar heat transmission (TTS) is minimized.

Claim 15 (method/use). A method comprising utilizing the composite pane of claim 1 as a roof panel of a vehicle (e.g., a motor vehicle such as a passenger car). This is the claim underlying the "use as a sunroof/roof panel" aspect.

---

Noteworthy Dependent Limitations (Claims 2–14, 16–20)

• Claim 2: Interior-side light reflectance < 6% at 8°.
• Claim 3 / 17: Sun protection coating is a layer stack with at least one metal layer (e.g., silver) between dielectric oxide/nitride layers.
• Claim 4 / 5: Sun protection coating either applied directly to the interior side of the outer pane, or on a carrier film embedded in the intermediate layer.
• Claim 6 / 18 / 19: Intermediate layer of at least one polymer film (PVB, EVA, PU, or copolymers), preferably tinted with 2%–80% TL (8%–36% preferred).
• Claim 8: TCO is ITO, Sb- or F-doped tin oxide, and/or Al- or Ga-doped zinc oxide.
• Claim 9: Low-E-coated inner pane alone has TL of 25%–95%.
• Claim 12: Preferred A-value ranges tied to intermediate-layer TL (e.g., A = 0.07–0.08 when the interlayer TL > 30%).
• Claim 13: Pane thickness 0.5–4 mm.
• Claim 14 / 20: Optional electrically switchable functional element (PDLC or SPD) embedded in the intermediate layer.

---

Search-Result Notes / Uncertainty

• I confirmed the patent identity via Google Patents (patents.google.com/patent/US11001037/en) and Justia (patents.justia.com/patent/11001037); both match the text supplied.
• USPTO-specific queries (patft/ppubs/Patent Center) returned no direct snippet results in my searches, so I could not independently verify USPTO bibliographic data beyond the Google/Justia records and the supplied text.
• CAFC 2026 docket search returned no results — I found no evidence of any CAFC appeal, IPR, or litigation involving US 11001037 in 2026. I cannot confirm any pending proceeding; the absence of results does not definitively prove none exists, but nothing in the searchable record indicates one.
• The current assignee (Saint-Gobain Sekurit France SAS) reflects the 2025 assignment record; the grant itself issued to Saint-Gobain Glass France.

The initial searches returned no relevant litigation results. Let me try more targeted searches on litigation databases.

The Delhi case concerns a different Saint-Gobain patent application (not US 11001037). Let me search more specific litigation databases.

Based on my searches, I have not found any litigation involving US patent 11001037 (US11001037B2). I checked multiple litigation-oriented sources and search strategies, and every apparent "hit" turned out to be a false positive. Here is what I found and why each result was excluded:

Search results and false positives

1. Unified Patents litigation portal (portal.unifiedpatents.com): A site-restricted search for "11001037" returned no results.

2. General patent-litigation queries ("US11001037" + lawsuit/litigation/complaint/infringement): Returned no results.

3. PACER/Justia docket search ("11001037" + docket/PACER): The only hit was Edwards v. Integris Health Edmond, No. 23-6065 (10th Cir., filed May 8, 2023), where "11001037" appears only as a PACER docket-entry number (entry [11001037]: "Fee paid" on 05/23/2023), not as a patent number. This is a coincidental docket-entry identifier in an employment-discrimination appeal — unrelated to US 11001037.

4. Saint-Gobain-related court search: Two results, both unrelated to US 11001037:

   • Saint Gobain Glass France v. Assistant Controller of Patents (Delhi High Court, judgment Sept. 11, 2025) — concerns the refusal of an Indian patent application for "Material comprising a stack of thin layers" on obviousness grounds. Different jurisdiction, different patent, different subject matter.
   • US 2023/0258995 A1 ("Composite pane having electrically controllable optical properties") — a different Saint-Gobain patent application publication, not US 11001037.

5. A raw search for "11001037 patent litigation" returned only an irrelevant Sanskrit-text PDF (Mahabharata verse numbering coincidentally includes "11001037").

Conclusion

No litigation (district court, CAFC, ITC, or post-grant proceeding such as IPR/PGR) involving US patent 11001037 was identified. There is no evidence of any pending or concluded case naming US 11001037 as of April 26, 2026.

Caveat on confidence: My search tools returned no relevant results, and the earlier CAFC docket check was likewise empty, but absence from these searchable indexes does not definitively prove that no proceeding exists — particularly for cases filed only in PACER-paywalled district courts or proceedings not indexed by the free sources I could query. If you need a definitive clearance, the next steps would be a paid PACER nationwide case-search by patent number, a check of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for IPRs/PGRs, and a review of the USPTO Assignment/legal-status record (which currently shows only the 2025 "nunc pro tunc" assignment to Saint-Gobain Sekurit France and the 2024 maintenance-fee payment — no litigation flags).

Proceedings overview

There is exactly one AIA trial proceeding on US 11001037 currently on file: IPR2026-00462, filed 2026-08-21 by Fuyao Glass Industry Group Co., Ltd et al. against Saint-Gobain, with status Pending — it is in the pre-institution phase as of today's date (the petition was filed the same day this analysis was run). Breakdown: 0 claims invalidated, 0 claims sustained, 0 settled, 0 institution denied, 1 pending pre-institution review. The bottom line for a defendant: the patent is completely untested at the PTAB — all 20 claims are still in full force, and the only proceeding is a brand-new petition that has not even been through the institution decision yet. There is no PTAB "hardening" or "softening" to rely on either way; the sole signal is that a major direct competitor (Fuyao) has put the patent in its crosshairs.

---

IPR2026-00462 — Fuyao Glass Industry Group Co., Ltd et al. v. Saint-Gobain (Glass France / Sekurit France)

• Type: Inter Partes Review (35 U.S.C. §§ 311–319)
• Filed: 2026-08-21
• Status: Pending (verbatim from the USPTO Open Data Portal record: "status: Pending"; last modified 2026-08-21). Plain-English gloss: the petition was filed today and is in the pre-institution phase — no panel, no institution decision, no trial has begun.
• Judge panel: Not yet public. PTAB panels are typically designated at or near the institution decision; no APJ names have been published for this proceeding in any source I could search.
• Petition grounds: Not yet publicly available in searchable sources. The petition was filed the same day as this analysis, and no copy has surfaced on PTAB E2E, CourtListener, or secondary sources yet. I therefore cannot state which claims (all 20, or a subset) are challenged, what prior art is cited, or whether the grounds are § 102 anticipation, § 103 obviousness, or both. Do not assume claim coverage or art until the petition is docketed publicly.
• Institution decision: None yet. Under 35 U.S.C. § 314(b)(1), the Board must decide whether to institute within 6 months of filing — due no later than approximately 2027-02-21 — unless the Director extends for good cause under § 314(b)(2) (up to ~2027-08-21). The patent owner's preliminary response is due 3 months from filing, ~2026-11-21 (37 CFR § 42.107(b)).
• Final Written Decision: None — not applicable. No FWD can exist for a petition filed today; if the Board institutes, the FWD is due within 12 months of the institution decision (§ 316(a)(11)), i.e., roughly 2028-02-21 at the earliest, extendable to ~2028-08-21 for good cause.
• Settlement / termination: None — none possible or on record at this stage.
• Appeal: None — there is no decision to appeal.
• Defensive value: Neutral-to-cautionary for a defendant. No claim has been canceled, so an infringement theory built on any of claims 1–20 is not weakened yet. But the petition is a live threat to the patent: if instituted and successful, the most-impactful claims (independent claim 1, and dependent claims 2–14 and 16–20 that narrow it) could be canceled. For a defendant today, the practical value is leverage and information: a sophisticated competitor has studied this patent and found grounds it believes merit review — worth obtaining a copy of the petition the moment it is publicly docketed, and worth considering as a basis to seek a stay if you are sued in district court.

---

Strategic summary

Claims status — CANCELED vs. SUSTAINED vs. UNTESTED. Every claim of US 11001037 — claims 1 through 20 — remains in force and untested at the PTAB. Independent claim 1 (the composite pane with the sun protection coating, TCO-based low-E coating, 1%–12% TL, and transmittance index A of 0.02–0.08) has not been challenged to a decision. Dependent claims 2–14 and 16–20 (including claim 15, the use-as-vehicle-roof-panel claim) are likewise untouched. Nothing has been canceled; nothing has been sustained; everything is pending or unproceeded. The only proceeding is IPR2026-00462, which has not even cleared institution.

Estoppel landscape. No estoppel attaches yet: § 315(e)(2) estoppel only arises after a Final Written Decision on the merits, and no FWD exists. Two adjacent statutory bars are worth flagging for any defendant considering its own challenge: (i) § 315(b) bars an IPR petition filed more than one year after service of a complaint alleging infringement of this patent — so if you have already been sued (or expect to be), the one-year clock is running and may have started; and (ii) § 315(e)(1) bars a petitioner who files a civil action challenging validity before filing its petition. If Fuyao's IPR is instituted and reaches a FWD, estoppel would bind Fuyao and its privies only — a defendant not in privity with Fuyao would remain free to raise any § 102/§ 103 ground, including art Fuyao raised or reasonably could have raised. Conversely, if you are aligned with Fuyao (e.g., as a customer or supply-chain privy), you would inherit the estoppel and should map your available art now.

Pattern signals. The petitioner is Fuyao Glass Industry Group Co., Ltd. "et al." — the "et al." indicates multiple named petitioners (likely Fuyao entities or affiliates), but the full petitioner and real-party-in-interest list is not yet public. This is not a defensive-aggregator filing (no Unified Patents-style entity in the chain). It is a direct-competitor attack: Fuyao and Saint-Gobain are global rivals in automotive glazing, and the parallel EPO record shows an active cross-border fight — Saint-Gobain (with AGC) opposed Fuyao's European HUD patent EP 3 187 917 B1; the EPO Opposition Division revoked it in December 2023 and the Boards of Appeal upheld the revocation in March 2026. Fuyao's IPR against Saint-Gobain's US sunroof-pane patent should be read in that light — likely a countermeasure in a broader commercial dispute rather than a one-off validity swipe. This is the first PTAB petition against US 11001037; there is no prior pattern of repeated IPRs by the same petitioner, and no PTAB-appeal history for Saint-Gobain on this patent (Saint-Gobain has a broader PTAB footprint through its Ceramics & Plastics entities, but nothing on this patent).

---

Recommended next steps

1. Pull the petition immediately. The moment IPR2026-00462's petition is publicly docketed, retrieve it from PTAB E2E (https://ptab.uspto.gov — search IPR2026-00462) or the USPTO Open Data Portal. It will tell you: which claims are challenged, the exact prior-art references and statutory grounds, the real parties in interest, and whether Fuyao's challenge is built on the same art Saint-Gobain already distinguished in prosecution (the cited art of record includes DE 19927683 C1, WO2013/127563 A1, WO2013/131667 A1, and US 2016/0002100 A1). Do not litigate on the assumption the petition covers claim 1 — verify.

2. Mark the statutory milestones. Patent owner preliminary response due ~2026-11-21 (3 months from filing). Institution decision due ~2027-02-21 (6 months from filing; extendable to ~2027-08-21 for good cause under § 314(b)(2)). If instituted, the trial runs 12 months to a Final Written Decision (~2028-02-21 at the earliest, ~2028-08-21 with extension). A denial at institution would leave the patent fully intact and Fuyao free to pursue district-court validity challenges (institution denials are unreviewable on appeal, so the fight would move to court).

3. If you are a defendant being asserted against this patent today: (a) do not assume any claim is dead — all 20 claims remain enforceable; (b) check whether the § 315(b) one-year bar has already started running against you (it runs from service of any complaint alleging infringement of this patent, not just yours); (c) consider whether a district-court stay motion tied to IPR2026-00462 is viable — stay practice favors defendants when an IPR is instituted, but at this pre-institution stage many courts wait for the institution decision; and (d) begin your own prior-art sweep now, because if Fuyao's IPR is denied institution or settles, you cannot rely on it and your independent grounds (plus the § 315(e)(2) freedom you retain as a non-privy) will be your only PTAB route — and the one-year clock from service does not pause.

4. If no further PTAB activity appears in the coming months, do not read that as weakness — this patent was only first challenged on 2026-08-21. The absence of prior IPRs against a well-asserted, competitor-relevant patent (with an active assignee and paid maintenance fees) is consistent with the patent having only recently become a litigation/assertion target; the Fuyao petition is the first real test, and its institution decision will be the pivotal event.

Verification caveat: As of 2026-08-21, no Final Written Decision, institution decision, settlement, or Federal Circuit appeal exists for IPR2026-00462 or any other proceeding on US 11001037 — and I found no public copy of the petition itself in any searchable source. Every statement above about the proceeding's substance is therefore limited to what the USPTO Open Data Portal record shows (filing date, status, petitioner) plus the statutory deadlines that follow mechanically from a 2026-08-21 filing. If you need the petition's grounds before it is publicly indexed, it must be obtained directly from PTAB E2E or the USPTO.

I have reached the limit of my search tool budget, so I'll reconstruct the assignment record from the authoritative Google Patents legal-events data (which reproduces the USPTO Assignment records) and from the previously generated sections. I was not able to pull the correspondent-of-record names from the USPTO Assignment Center directly (it is an interactive application not accessible to my search tools), so I flag every place where that gap affects a finding.

---

Inventors

Pattern check: No unusual departure pattern. All three inventors signed over to Saint-Gobain Glass France in the recorded assignment (executed 2020-10-07 to 2020-11-01, reel 054550/0408) and remain in Saint-Gobain's inventor pool on later filings (e.g., the Sekurit assignee profile still shows Schulz). This is a normal employee-inventor chain, not a pre-fire-sale mass-departure signal.

---

Original assignee

• Entity named on the issued patent / original assignee: Saint-Gobain Glass France SAS (Courbevoie, FR) — the flat-glass and glazing arm of Compagnie de Saint-Gobain. The US application (US16/769,454, filed 2018-10-15 as the national stage of PCT/EP2018/078077) was filed by Saint-Gobain Glass France SAS, and the inventors' assignment to it was recorded 2020-12-04 (reel 054550/0408), pre-grant.
• Product line: Yes — the claims describe a laminated automotive roof/sunroof pane combining an IR-reflecting (silver-based) sun-protection coating with a TCO (ITO) low-E coating and a transmittance index A of 0.02–0.08. This is squarely Saint-Gobain's automotive glazing product line (sunroofs, panoramic roofs), which the group commercializes through its Sekurit automotive-glazing fabrication subsidiary.
• Current status: Operating. Saint-Gobain Glass France is a solvent, operating subsidiary of a large-cap public company (Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, Euronext Paris). No bankruptcy, no acquisition, no dissolution. The 4th-year maintenance fee on US 11001037 was paid 2024-10-30, consistent with a commercially valuable, still-enforced portfolio.

---

Assignment timeline

The USPTO Assignment Center record for US 11001037, as reproduced in the Google Patents legal-events data (the authoritative patent text supplied), shows exactly two recorded assignments. I could not retrieve the correspondent-of-record names for either from the Assignment Center interface in this environment; that gap is flagged below.

1. Executed 2020-10-07 to 2020-11-01 / recorded 2020-12-04 — Reel 054550 / Frame 0408

• Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors' Interest ("ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS)")
• Assignor: Jan Hagen, Robert Besler, Valentin Schulz (the inventors)
• Assignee: Saint-Gobain Glass France
• Correspondent: Not retrievable from available sources — the Google Patents legal-event extract does not include the correspondent; the Assignment Center record could not be queried interactively. (No recurrence finding possible on this leg.)
• Context: Standard inventor-to-employer assignment, executed during prosecution (pre-grant, patent issued 2021-05-11). No NPE significance.

2. Executed/effective 2025-05-05 / recorded 2025-05-16 — Reel 071969 / Frame 0743

• Conveyance: Nunc Pro Tunc Assignment
• Assignor: Saint-Gobain Glass France
• Assignee: Saint-Gobain Sekurit France
• Correspondent: Not retrievable from available sources — same limitation as above.
• Context: Internal corporate reorganization / IP-alignment transfer. "Nunc pro tunc" (retroactive) assignments of this type are routine when a group moves IP from the R&D/glass-manufacturing entity (Glass France) to the entity that actually commercializes the product (Sekurit France, the automotive-glazing fabricator). This is the transfer that made Saint-Gobain Sekurit France the current assignee of record, and it matches the "Current Assignee" shown on Google Patents.

No other records: No security agreements, no licenses, no mergers, no releases, no corrections are on the legal-events record. The only other legal events are the 2024-10-30 maintenance-fee payment and the 2025-05-16 nunc pro tunc assignment above.

---

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11001037
    2017 : Priority filed in Europe
    2018 : US national stage filed
    2020 : Inventors assign to Saint-Gobain Glass
    2021 : Patent issued
    2024 : Maintenance fee paid
    2025 : Nunc pro tunc transfer to Sekurit
    2026 : Fuyao files IPR challenge

---

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present. The only post-issuance transfer is from Saint-Gobain Glass France to Saint-Gobain Sekurit France (reel 071969/0743, 2025-05-16) — a named, century-old operating automotive-glazing manufacturer (Thourotte, FR plant; global Sekurit production network), not an "IP/Licensing/Holdings" LLC, no registered-agent address, no single-purpose entity. The assignee manufactures exactly the product class the claims cover (laminated vehicle roof panes).

2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. Neither Saint-Gobain Glass France nor Saint-Gobain Sekurit France appears on any public NPE list (Acacia, Marathon, IV, IPNav, Wi-LAN, Conversant, Vringo, Pendrell, Innovatio, MPHJ, Lumen View, Round Rock, Document Generation Corp, or Spangenberg entities). Both are operating subsidiaries of Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, a Fortune Global 500 industrial group.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — unclear / unverifiable. I could not retrieve the correspondent-of-record names for reel 054550/0408 or reel 071969/0743 from the USPTO Assignment Center in this environment, and the Google Patents extracts do not carry correspondents. This is a data-availability gap, not a finding. No correspondent-recurrence pattern can be asserted or excluded. (Flagged explicitly per instructions — the single most useful NPE tell is unavailable here.)

4. Cascading transfers — not present. Two transfers total, 4.5 years apart (2020-12-04, 2025-05-16), both within the Saint-Gobain group, with no chained LLCs, no shared correspondents (per limitation above), no rapid-fire conveyance sequence.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — not present. No infringement suit naming US 11001037 has been identified (per the earlier litigation sweep). The 2025-05-16 transfer is not tied to any known complaint; the only 2026 proceeding is IPR2026-00462, a validity challenge against the patent by Fuyao (filed 2026-08-21) — i.e., the patent is being attacked, not asserted through a newly arranged chain.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. Saint-Gobain is solvent; no Chapter 7/11, no estate sale, no Kodak/Nortel-style proceeding.

7. Privateering — not present. No transfer to an NPE that asserts on the operating company's behalf; no SEC 10-K/8-K disclosure of any such arrangement. The chain stays entirely inside the operating group.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain does not terminate at RPX, AST, LOT, Unified Patents, or OIN. It terminates at an operating manufacturer (Saint-Gobain Sekurit France), so this is the inverse of the neutralized-patent pattern — the patent is live and commercially guarded (maintenance fee paid 2024; competitor IPR filed 2026).

---

Verdict

Operating-company assertion.

The chain is a textbook internal corporate chain: inventors → Saint-Gobain Glass France (reel 054550/0408, recorded 2020-12-04) → Saint-Gobain Sekurit France via nunc pro tunc reorg (reel 071969/0743, recorded 2025-05-16). The current assignee is a large operating manufacturer that ships products embodying the claims (automotive roof panes with sun-protection + TCO low-E coatings), has paid maintenance fees, and is the target — not the author — of the only 2026 proceeding (Fuyao's IPR2026-00462). Zero NPE signals are present (shell transfer, known asserter, cascades, privateering, bankruptcy, defensive aggregation all absent; correspondent analysis unverifiable but no evidence of recurrence). The one caveat: no infringement suit by Saint-Gobain has been identified in public sources, so "assertion" is inferred from the operating-company chain, the commercial product fit, and the competitor attack — not from a filed complaint.

Verification: USPTO Patent Assignment Search — https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/ (search patent number 11001037; records at reel/frame 054550/0408 and 071969/0743). Correspondent-of-record details for both entries should be pulled from that interface to close the one open data gap in this analysis.

The initial searches confirmed several key references. Let me continue researching the remaining citations listed on US 11001037.

I've reached the tool-step limit for this session, so I'll now synthesize the prior-art analysis from the authoritative patent text supplied, the USPTO/Google Patents/Justia records, and the searches completed above. Where a reference's full text was not retrievable in this session, I flag it explicitly rather than fabricate details.

---

Prior-Art Analysis — US 11001037 B2 ("Composite pane having sun protection coating and thermal-radiation-reflecting coating")

1. USPTO database search confirmation

A site-restricted USPTO query for 11001037 returned no snippet results in this session (the query returned an empty set). The patent's identity is nevertheless confirmed from the authoritative text supplied and the Google Patents / Justia records (patents.google.com/patent/US11001037/en; patents.justia.com/patent/11001037), which agree on: US11001037B2, application US16/769,454 (national stage of PCT/EP2018/078077), priority 2017-12-05 (EP 17 205 439.7), issue 2021-05-11. No similar-numbered patent was conflated; the analysis below is specific to US11001037B2.

Effective filing date for § 102 purposes: 2017-12-05 (earliest priority). Because the application has an effective filing date after 2013-03-16, the AIA framework applies: any reference that was "patented, described in a printed publication, or otherwise available to the public" before 2017-12-05 is § 102(a)(1) prior art. Every reference cited on the face of US11001037 qualifies as § 102(a)(1) art (all published no later than 2016-01-07).

2. Element checklist for claim 1 (used throughout)

Overarching finding: E7 — the transmittance index A, a dimensionless parameter newly defined by this patent — is not disclosed in, and almost certainly not inherent in, any cited reference. Likewise E6 (TL of 1–12%) is only approached, not met, by the closest references. Consequently, no cited reference, standing alone, fully anticipates claim 1 or any claim that incorporates it (claims 2–14, 16–20 depend on claim 1; claim 15 incorporates claim 1 by reference). The analysis below therefore identifies, for each reference, which elements it does put in the prior art and which claims/elements it "potentially anticipates" in the partial sense, plus its value as a § 103 primary reference. A true anticipation challenge would have to rely on inherency of E6/E7, which the record does not support for these references.

---

3. Per-reference analysis

3.1 DE 19927683 C1 — the closest single reference

• Full citation: DE 199 27 683 C1, "Verbundglasscheibe" (Laminated glass pane reflecting sun and heat rays), Sekurit Saint-Gobain Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG. Priority 1999-06-17; granted/published 2001-01-25. Family: EP 1 060 876 B1 (priority DE 19927683, 1999-06-17; EP filed 2000-06-14).
• Description: Composite glass pane of at least two glass panes joined by a transparent thermoplastic composite layer, carrying a sun protection layer that substantially reflects radiation outside the visible spectrum (in particular IR; a silver-based layer stack with metal-oxide/nitride dielectric layers, e.g., AlN/Si₃N₄), and a further transparent low-E coating on the surface facing the interior space, spatially separated from the sun protection layer. Per the EP family abstract, the thermal-radiation-reflecting layer is a doped metal oxide — specifically fluorine-doped tin oxide (F:SnO₂), deposited by pyrolysis — i.e., a TCO. This is the document the patent itself names as the "generic part of claim 1."
• § 102 assessment: Discloses E1, E2, E3, E4, E5 (F:SnO₂ is a transparent conductive oxide within claim 1's TCO limitation). Missing: E6 — the patent's own description states the DE pane's light transmittance is, for example, 31%, outside the claimed 1–12%; and E7 (A-index) is nowhere disclosed. → Does not fully anticipate claim 1 as disclosed; the strongest § 103 primary reference on the structural combination (sun-protection coating inside the laminate + TCO low-E on side 4).

3.2 WO 2013/127563 A1 (= WO2013127563A1) — closest structural match on the low-E side

• Full citation: WO 2013/127563 A1, "Composite pane having a sun protection and a heat protection function," Saint-Gobain Glass France. PCT/EP2013/050999 filed 2013-01-21; priority EP 12157067.5, 2012-02-27; published 2013-09-06. Family: EP 2 819 844 B1; US 2014/0377580 A1 (granted US 10,017,416 B2, Manz).
• Description: Composite pane with outer pane, inner pane, thermoplastic intermediate layer, a sun protection layer (containing at least one functional silver layer) on side II, side III, or in the intermediate layer, and a heat-protection (low-E) layer on the interior-side surface (side IV) whose functional layer contains niobium, tantalum, molybdenum, or zirconium. This is the reference the patent describes in its Background as "another composite pane having a sun protection layer between the glass panes and a low-E coating on the interior-side surface."
• § 102 assessment: Discloses E1, E2, E3, E4 and the placement of a low-E coating on side IV, but fails E5 — its low-E functional layer is a metal (Nb/Ta/Mo/Zr), not a transparent conductive oxide — and fails E6/E7. → Does not anticipate claim 1. Primary § 103 candidate to be combined with a TCO-low-E reference (e.g., § 3.3) for element E5.

3.3 WO 2013/131667 A1 — the TCO low-E reference

• Full citation: WO 2013/131667 A1, "Sheet with coating which reflects thermal radiation," Saint-Gobain Glass France. PCT/EP2013/050698 filed 2013-01-16; published 2013-09-12. US family: US 9,546,866 B2.
• Description: A pane/sheet with a thermal-radiation-reflecting (low-E) coating on the interior-side surface, the coating comprising a functional layer of a transparent conductive oxide (ITO and related TCOs), with dielectric layers above and below to render the functional layer antireflective; low interior-side reflection and emissivity. Named in the patent's description as the source of suitable thermal-radiation-reflecting coatings.
• § 102 assessment: Discloses E5 (TCO-based low-E on the interior-side surface). Missing: E1–E4 composite structure (single-pane focus; no sun-protection coating between panes as claimed) and E6/E7. → Cannot anticipate claim 1 alone; supplies the TCO limitation for § 103 combinations.

3.4 US 2016/0002100 A1 — TCO low-E (US family member)

• Full citation: US 2016/0002100 A1, "Pane with thermal radiation reflecting coating," Saint-Gobain Glass France. Filed 2013-02-20 (per the citation record); published 2016-01-07.
• Description: A pane with a thermal-radiation-reflecting (low-E) coating, functionally similar to WO 2013/131667 A1 (TCO-based functional layer with dielectric over/under-layers for antireflection). This is the most recent reference on the face of the patent.
• § 102 assessment: Same position as § 3.3: discloses E5 only; misses the laminated structure (E1–E4) and the optical-index limitations (E6/E7). Not anticipatory alone.

3.5 WO 2013/104439 A1 — sun-protection coating stack reference

• Full citation: WO 2013/104439 A1, "Transparent pane with electrically conductive coating," Saint-Gobain Glass France. Priority 2012-01-10; published 2013-07-18.
• Description: Transparent pane carrying an electrically conductive coating — a stack of metallic (silver) functional layers with dielectric layers — cited in the patent as a source of "suitable sun protection coatings."
• § 102 assessment: Discloses the E4-type coating structure (silver-based IR-reflecting stack). Missing: the composite pane assembly (E1–E3), the low-E-on-side-IV placement/TCO (E5), and E6/E7. Not anticipatory; art for the sun-protection-coating element in combinations.

3.6 US 2006/0182980 A1 — dark-tinted vehicle glazing with interior low-E (strong secondary reference)

• Full citation: US 2006/0182980 A1, "Solar control glazing," Pilkington plc / Pilkington Automotive Limited (Barton et al.). Priority GB 2003-07-11; US filing US 10/563,917 (national stage, filed 2004-07-09); published 2006-08-17. Related granted family: US 8,632,886 B2 ("Solar control glazing," Barton et al.).
• Description: Vehicle glazing comprising a pane of tinted glass (1.0–1.8 wt% total iron as Fe₂O₃, 100–270 ppm Co₃O₄, <20 ppm Se; dark tint, VLT ≤ 50%) with a low-E coating on the interior surface; the low-E coating may include a transparent conductive oxide (optionally doped) or a metal layer with dielectric; a laminated embodiment has two glass plies with a (clear or tinted, optionally IR-reflecting) PVB interlayer; particularly suited as a roof glazing.
• § 102 assessment: Discloses E1, E2, E3 (laminated embodiment), E5 (interior-surface low-E, optionally TCO), and a dark-tinted glazing concept relevant to E6; use as a roof glazing (relevant to claim 15's use limitation). Missing: an E4 sun-protection coating between the panes reflecting/absorbing IR (the IR-reflecting option is in the interlayer material, not clearly a "coating between the panes" as claimed), and E6/E7 (the claimed 1–12% TL and the A-index are not taught). → Not anticipatory; a strong § 103 secondary reference for the dark-glass + interior-low-E combination.

3.7 WO 2006/043026 A1 — absorptive coating + interior low-E, low-VLT glazing

• Full citation: WO 2006/043026 A1, "Solar control glazing," Pilkington Group Limited. Priority 2004-10-18; published 2006-04-27. (Corresponds to EP 1 824 676 B1 / US 2008/070045 A1 family.)
• Description: Vehicle glazing (monolithic or laminated) with an absorptive coating (absorbing radiation >400 nm, providing privacy/solar control) on one surface and a low-E coating on the interior surface (emissivity 0.01 to <0.3), the glazing having visible light transmission of 20% or less and transmitted energy of 20% or less.
• § 102 assessment: Discloses E1/E2 (monolithic or laminated pane), E5 (low-E on interior surface), and low-VLT performance in the vicinity of E6 (≤20% disclosed; the claimed 1–12% window not specifically taught). Missing: an E4 sun-protection coating between the panes in the claimed arrangement, and E7. → Not anticipatory; relevant § 103 art on combining absorptive solar control with an interior low-E layer at low VLT.

3.8 US 2009/0046355 A1 — Pilkington vehicle glazing

• Full citation: US 2009/0046355 A1, "Vehicle glazing," Pilkington Automotive Deutschland GmbH. Priority DE application 2006-01-06; published 2009-02-19.
• Description: Vehicle glazing (laminated automotive glazing with functional coatings). Full text not retrieved in this session; the citation record confirms assignee and subject-matter field (vehicle glazing).
• § 102 assessment (cautious): On the available record, no specific disclosure of the claim-1 combination or of E6/E7 can be confirmed. → No demonstrated anticipation; treat as background art unless the full text reveals otherwise.

3.9 WO 2008/155516 A1 / EP 2 167 436 A1 — bent, coated, laminated glazing process

• Full citation: WO 2008/155516 A1, "A method of production of a bent, coated, laminated glazing, and a resultant glazing," Pilkington Group Limited. Priority 2007-06-18; published 2008-12-24 (EP 2 167 436 A1 published 2010-03-31).
• Description: Process for producing a bent, coated, laminated glazing and the resulting product — i.e., manufacturing context for automotive coated laminates.
• § 102 assessment: Primarily method/process art. No teaching of the A-index (E7) or the specific TL range (E6); no evidence it discloses the claimed TCO-low-E-on-side-IV + between-panes sun-protection combination as claimed. → Not anticipatory; peripheral.

3.10 US 2010/0165436 A1 — RF-interference reduction for functional glazings

• Full citation: US 2010/0165436 A1, "RF interference reduction for functional glazings," Pilkington Group Limited. Priority 2007-07-03; published 2010-07-01.
• Description: Functional (coated) glazings modified to reduce radio-frequency interference — a coating/antenna-adjacent engineering issue, not a solar-control/low-E combination per se.
• § 102 assessment: No disclosure of the claim-1 structural combination or E6/E7. → Not anticipatory; peripheral.

3.11 WO 2009/029466 A1 — PPG vehicle transparency

• Full citation: WO 2009/029466 A1, "Vehicle transparency," PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. Priority 2007-08-24; published 2009-03-05.
• Description: Vehicle transparency (automotive glazing) with solar-control coating(s). Full text not retrieved in this session.
• § 102 assessment (cautious): On the available record, no disclosure of the claim-1 combination or E6/E7 is confirmed. → No demonstrated anticipation; § 103 background art for solar-control-coated vehicle glazings.

3.12 US 2015/0151675 A1 — AGC sunroof with lighting

• Full citation: US 2015/0151675 A1, "Sunroof comprising lighting means," AGC Glass Europe. Priority EP 2012-06-19; published 2015-06-04.
• Description: A sunroof (laminated glazing) incorporating lighting means. Full text not retrieved in this session.
• § 102 assessment (cautious): Relevant only to the sunroof/roof-panel use context of claim 15; no confirmed disclosure of the claimed coating combination, TL range (E6), or A-index (E7). → Not anticipatory.

3.13 US 2015/0165965 A1 — AGC glazed roof with illumination and light-transmission control

• Full citation: US 2015/0165965 A1, "Glazed roof comprising illuminating means and means for controlling light transmission," AGC Glass Europe. Priority EP 2012-06-19; published 2015-06-18.
• Description: Glazed vehicle roof with illumination and controllable light transmission (related to switchable-functionality roofs, cf. claims 14/20 of US11001037). Full text not retrieved in this session.
• § 102 assessment (cautious): Relevant to the optional PDLC/SPD functional-element dependent claims (14, 20) only as context; no confirmed disclosure of the E6/E7 limitations or the claimed coating stack. → Not anticipatory.

---

4. Ranking of most relevant prior art

1. DE 19927683 C1 — closest single reference: discloses E1–E5 (including a TCO, F:SnO₂, low-E on the interior side) but with TL ≈ 31% and no A-index → fails E6/E7.
2. WO 2013/127563 A1 (WO2013127563A1) — closest on structure (sun-protection layer between panes + low-E on side IV) but its low-E is Nb/Ta/Mo/Zr, not TCO → fails E5/E6/E7.
3. US 2006/0182980 A1 (Pilkington) — dark-tinted laminated glazing with interior low-E (optionally TCO) and roof-glazing use → fails E4/E6/E7.
4. WO 2006/043026 A1 (Pilkington) — absorptive coating + interior low-E at VLT ≤ 20% → fails E4-as-claimed/E7.
5. WO 2013/131667 A1 / US 2016/0002100 A1 (Saint-Gobain) — TCO low-E coatings on interior surfaces → supply E5 only.

5. Bottom line on § 102

Because every claim of US 11001037 incorporates the 1–12% TL limitation (E6) and the transmittance-index-A limitation (E7), and because no cited reference teaches — and the record does not support inherency of — a pane satisfying A = TL_composite/(TL_low-E-coated pane × TE) within 0.02–0.08, no cited reference fully anticipates claim 1 or any claim dependent on it. The realistic attack on this patent is § 103 obviousness using DE 19927683 C1 or WO 2013/127563 A1 as primary reference, combined with a TCO-low-E reference (WO 2013/131667 A1 / US 2016/0002100 A1) and/or the Pilkington dark-glazing references — a combination strategy consistent with the grounds Fuyao would need to establish in IPR2026-00462 (whose petition was filed 2026-08-21 and whose cited art is not yet publicly docketed).

Confidence note: Full texts for US 2009/0046355 A1, WO 2009/029466 A1, US 2015/0151675 A1, and US 2015/0165965 A1 were not retrievable within this session's search limits; their § 102 assessments above are based on the citation record and patent-family knowledge, and should be verified against the documents before reliance in any pleading.

I have solid detail on the key Saint-Gobain references. Let me verify the remaining cited references (Pilkington, PPG, AGC, and WO2013/104439A1) before composing the obviousness analysis.

Obviousness Analysis — US 11001037 B2 Under 35 U.S.C. § 103

Scope note. This analysis uses the prior art cited on the face of US 11001037 B2 ("the '037 patent"): DE 19927683 C1; WO2013/127563A1; WO2013/131667A1; WO2013/104439A1; WO2006/043026A1 / US2006/0182980A1; US2009/0046355A1; WO2009/029466A1; US2010/0165436A1; US2015/0151675A1; US2015/0165965A1; and US2016/0002100A1. All of these were published before the '037 patent's priority date of 2017-12-05 and qualify as § 102 prior art. I verified the content of the most probative references (DE 19927683 C1/EP 1060876, WO2013/127563A1/EP 2819844, WO2013/131667A1, US2016/0002100A1, and the Pilkington solar-control family) against live records; the analysis below is grounded in what those documents actually disclose.

---

1. Legal framework and the person of ordinary skill

Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 and Graham v. John Deere, obviousness is assessed through (i) the scope and content of the prior art, (ii) the differences between the prior art and the claims, (iii) the level of ordinary skill, and (iv) secondary considerations. Under KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, a combination of known elements is obvious when the result is the predictable product of combining them according to known methods, when a design need or market pressure points to the solution, and when "obvious to try" applies to a finite field of identified, predictable solutions.

PHOSITA: an engineer or materials scientist (glass science, materials science, physics, or chemical engineering background, roughly 3–5 years' experience) designing laminated automotive glazings with functional coatings — conversant with ISO 9050 optical measurement, sputtered/pyrolytic coating stacks, tinted glass and PVB interlayers, and automotive roof-glazing requirements (sunroofs, panoramic roofs). This profile is consistent with the art of record: the same people (e.g., Jan Hagen, named inventor of both the '037 patent and WO2013/131667A1's family) worked across these references, which are all in the same technical field.

---

2. Claim 1 mapped against the prior art

Claim 1 requires: (a) a laminate of outer pane / thermoplastic interlayer / inner pane; (b) a sun protection coating between the panes reflecting/absorbing IR; (c) a thermal-radiation-reflecting (low-E) coating containing a transparent conductive oxide (TCO) on the interior-side surface of the inner pane; (d) composite light transmittance TL = 1–12%; and (e) a transmittance index A = TL_composite/(TL_low-E pane × TE) = 0.02–0.08 (ISO 9050).

The structural skeleton of claim 1 — a solar-control laminate with a low-E coating on the cabin side — is not new. DE 19927683 C1 (the reference the '037 patent concedes as the generic starting point) discloses every structural element, including a TCO (FTO) low-E layer, and expressly contemplates use "as a windscreen, a side window, a rear window or roof of a car." The remaining question is whether the two numerical limitations — TL 1–12% and A = 0.02–0.08 — are obvious refinements.

---

3. Combination 1 (primary): DE 19927683 C1 + WO2013/131667A1 (and/or US2016/0002100A1)

Disclosure. DE 19927683 C1 gives the full architecture: two glass panes joined by a thermoplastic layer; an IR-reflecting sun protection layer (silver between nitride/oxide dielectrics) inside the laminate; and a transparent, mechanically resistant low-E layer on the interior-facing surface, spatially separated from the sun protection layer. Its low-E layer is a pyrolytic doped metal oxide (FTO). WO2013/131667A1 discloses a sputtered TCO-based (ITO) thermal-radiation-reflecting coating — dielectric/barrier/functional/antireflection stack — designed precisely for the interior-side surface of an automotive pane, with improved bendability and corrosion resistance (emissivity ≤ 25%, preferably ≤ 20%, per EN 12898). US2016/0002100A1 discloses a TCO low-E stack with optional darkening layers, aimed at dark panes including roof panels.

Motivation to combine. The '037 patent itself describes WO2013/131667A1 coatings as "known" low-E coatings for side IV. A PHOSITA building a DE 19927683 C1-style sunroof laminate would have had every reason to substitute the newer, bendable, corrosion-resistant ITO stack of WO2013/131667A1 (or the darkening-layer stack of US2016/0002100A1) for the pyrolytic FTO layer of DE 19927683 C1: (i) same field and same function (thermal-radiation reflection on the interior surface); (ii) known benefit — ITO/TCO sputtered stacks survive the bending and prestressing that automotive roof panels undergo (US2016/0002100A1 ¶ [0006] emphasizes exactly this demand); (iii) substitution of one known low-E functional material (FTO) for another known TCO (ITO) is a textbook predictable-equivalent exchange. The TCO limitation of claim 1 is therefore met either literally by DE 19927683 C1's FTO or by the routine swap to ITO taught in WO2013/131667A1 / US2016/0002100A1.

---

4. Combination 2: DE 19927683 C1 + WO2013/127563A1 (+ WO2013/131667A1)

Disclosure. WO2013/127563A1 (EP 2819844 B1 / US 10017416) discloses the identical two-coating composite: a silver-containing sun protection coating on side II, side III, or inside the thermoplastic interlayer, and a heat protection (low-E) coating on side IV. Its functional low-E metal (Nb/Ta/Mo/Zr) differs from DE's FTO and from the '037 patent's TCO, but the reference is highly probative for three reasons:

1. It recognizes the design problem the '037 patent addresses — reduced light transmission is "frequently desired with side or rear window panes and, in particular, with roof panels" — and it expressly discusses tinting panes or films of the composite pane to achieve it (noting cost and iron-oxide corrosion drawbacks).
2. It proves that by 2013, the art knew the low-E-on-side-IV plus solar-control-inside-the-laminate combination was the default approach for dark roof glazing.
3. It provides an independent motivation to select among known low-E materials (silver, Nb/Ta/Mo/Zr, TCO) based on corrosion resistance, bendability, emissivity, and cost — the same selection logic that leads to the claimed TCO layer.

Adding WO2013/131667A1 supplies the TCO functional layer. This three-reference combination renders every structural element of claim 1 old, with only the numeric parameters left.

---

5. Combination 3 (supplies the dark-TL limitation): DE 19927683 C1 + Pilkington solar-control family (WO2006/043026A1 / US2006/0182980A1)

The 1–12% TL limitation is the most easily sourced. The Pilkington family (WO2006/043026A1, US2006/0182980A1, and their sibling US2011/0217535A1) is devoted to laminated vehicle roof glazings combining:

• tinted glass and/or tinted PVB interlayers;
• an absorptive/solar-control function;
• a low-E coating on the interior surface (emissivity ~0.05–0.4, explicitly including TCO-based coatings);
• measured light transmissions as low as 4.9%, 9.3%, and 10.1% (US2006/0182980A1, Table 5, examples 49–52 with low-E-coated laminates).

This is nearly the whole of claim 1 in one reference family, including the 1–12% TL window. The '037 patent's own background concedes the target: sunroofs and sliding roofs "require light transmittance between 2 and 10%." A PHOSITA combining DE 19927683 C1's structure with the Pilkington teaching that dark roof laminates (TL ≈ 5–10%) with interior low-E coatings were achievable and desirable would arrive at the claimed pane by selecting known dark-tinted components (VG10/VG20/VG40/TSA glass, tinted PVB — all pre-existing commercial products identified in the '037 specification itself).

The AGC references (US2015/0151675A1, US2015/0165965A1) reinforce the same point: sunroof/glazed-roof applications with controlled light transmission and thermal management were a recognized design space before 2017.

---

6. The transmittance index A — the only real battleground

The single limitation not found verbatim in the cited art is A = TL_composite/(TL_low-E pane × TE) = 0.02–0.08. Three independent reasons support a finding that this limitation is obvious:

(a) A is a mathematical restatement of a known design space, not a new structural feature. A is a dimensionless ratio of three standard quantities (TL_composite, TL_low-E pane, TE) measured per ISO 9050 — the very standard used in the prior art (e.g., Pilkington's TE/TSHT tables). For the claimed dark-sunroof space — composite TL 2–10%, low-E-pane TL 25–95% (a range the '037 patent admits, and DE 19927683 C1 itself discloses 55–85%), and a solar-control laminate's TE of roughly 5–50% — the resulting A values fall naturally into the 0.02–0.08 band. The '037 patent's own Table 1 confirms: the "inventive" examples are just the standard dark-roof combinations (VG10/VG20/VG40/TSA4+ inner panes × tinted PVB × silver solar-control coating × ITO low-E), each of which happens to compute to an A in the claimed range. A claim limitation that merely expresses a known design choice in equation form does not generally confer patentability (see In re De Blauwe, 736 F.2d 699 (Fed. Cir. 1984) — reciting a mathematical relationship that is an inherent property of a known combination).

(b) The patent frames A as a routine selection variable. The specification states the "corresponding values can be suitably selected by the person skilled in the art to achieve a transmittance index A according to the invention" and that transmittance values "can be suitably adjusted through the selection of the tinting of the components." That is an admission that A is a tunable design parameter arrived at by routine component selection — the classic KSR "design need or market pressure" scenario. The goal it serves (interior-side RL < 6%, preferably < 4%) is itself a known goal admitted in the patent's own background: "Light reflectances of less than 6%, preferably of less than 4%, are not perceived as disturbing by vehicle occupants." Optimizing known parameters (glass tint, PVB tint, coating selection) to hit a known optical target is the paradigm of obviousness.

(c) "Obvious to try" with a finite, predictable field. Under KSR, where a known problem (interior reflection in dark sunroofs) has a finite number of identified solutions (adjusting the relative darkness of the outer pane, interlayer, and inner pane), the result is obvious. FIG. 2 of the '037 patent shows a smooth, monotonic trend — high-A panes (dark outer side) hold RL below 4% across a wide range of PVB tints, while low-A panes (dark inner side) do not. That trend is the predictable optical consequence of where the absorbing/tinting elements sit relative to the reflective low-E coating; the specification presents no criticality, no discontinuity, and no unexpected result at the claimed 0.02–0.08 window (indeed the table spans A = 0.02–0.08 with gradually changing RL of 3.1–3.9%).

Patentee's best counterargument (and its weakness). A skilled advocate would argue the A-range is a non-obvious discovery: that keeping A ≥ 0.02–0.08 (i.e., ensuring the composite pane's darkness is not dominated by the inner pane/low-E side) is what decouples interior reflectance from interlayer tinting, enabling one product line to span PVB tints of 8–36% while holding RL < 4%. The weakness: the specification nowhere demonstrates criticality or an unexpected technical effect at the boundary values; the comparative example (3.9 mm VG10 inner pane, A = 0.22) merely shows that a different component selection leaves the claimed range — i.e., the range is descriptive of a design choice, not inventive. The Comparative Example's RL of 3.1% is, notably, still below 4%, undercutting any argument that leaving the A-range produces a poor result.

---

7. Dependent claims 2–20

• Claims 2, 11 (RL < 6% at 8°): known benchmark acknowledged in the '037 patent's background as a pre-existing occupant-comfort target; achievable by the same tint/coating selection. Obvious.
• Claims 3, 17 (silver layer between dielectric oxides/nitrides): literally DE 19927683 C1 (silver between AlN/Si₃N₄) and WO2013/127563A1 (silver functional layer). Obvious.
• Claims 4, 5 (sun protection on side II, or on a PET carrier film in the interlayer): side-II placement is DE 19927683 C1 / WO2013/127563A1; the PET-carrier-film arrangement is admitted prior art in the '037 patent's own background ("a polyethylene terephthalate film between two polyvinyl butyral films") and in WO2013/127563A1's alternatives. Obvious.
• Claims 6, 18 (PVB/EVA/PU interlayer): standard; DE 19927683 C1 uses a thermoplastic interlayer. Obvious.
• Claims 7, 19 (tinted interlayer, TL 2–80%, preferably 8–36%): tinted PVB disclosed in WO2006/043026A1 / US2006/0182980A1; the ranges are routine selections for dark roof glazing. Obvious.
• Claim 8 (ITO, Sb/F-SnO₂, ZnO:Al/Ga): F-SnO₂ is DE 19927683 C1's own material; ITO is WO2013/131667A1's and US2016/0002100A1's material; ZnO:Al/Ga were known TCOs (noted in US2016/0002100A1's background). Obvious.
• Claim 9 (low-E pane TL 25–95%): DE 19927683 C1 discloses 55–85% for low-E-coated panes. Obvious.
• Claim 10 (composite TL 2–10%): the known sunroof range (patent's own admission; Pilkington examples at 4.9–10.1%). Obvious.
• Claim 12 (A-range laddered against interlayer TL): a parameter-optimization table of the type KSR treats as obvious. Obvious.
• Claim 13 (pane thickness 0.5–4 mm): standard automotive thicknesses (Pilkington examples: 2.1–3.1 mm; WO2013/131667A1 example: 2.9 mm). Obvious.
• Claims 14, 20 (PDLC/SPD functional element in the interlayer): SPD and PDLC films in laminated glazing interlayers were known (Pilkington's own PDLC/SPD interlayer filings are in the same art; Saint-Gobain's switchable-glazing family EA028935B1 / CA2893198C is cited on the '037 face); the '037 patent admits such elements "are typically used in combination with sun protection coatings." Adding a known switchable element to a known solar-control/low-E laminate is a predictable aggregation. Obvious.
• Claim 15 (use as vehicle roof panel): DE 19927683 C1 discloses roof use; the Pilkington and AGC references are roof-glazing-specific. Obvious.

---

8. Secondary considerations

Nothing in the record evidences the classic objective indicia: no unexpected results (the data show a monotonic, predictable trend), no long-felt need (the need for dark, low-reflection sunroofs was acknowledged in the art of record), no failure of others, no commercial-success evidence, and no copying evidence. The absence of objective evidence, combined with the '037 patent's own admissions (known structure, known TL target, known RL benchmark, and "can be suitably selected by the person skilled in the art"), leaves the obviousness case largely unanswered.

---

9. Teaching-away / counterarguments assessed

• WO2013/127563A1's criticism of tinted glass (iron-oxide corrosion, cost) is not a teaching away from dark panes; it points toward the very solution the '037 patent uses — tinting via the PVB interlayer and outer-pane selection — and toward TCO low-E coatings (which avoid silver-corrosion exposure on side IV). If anything, it reinforces the motivation.
• DE 19927683 C1's winter-comfort focus is not a teaching away from summer solar control; the '037 patent concedes the low-E layer performs both functions (reflecting heat back in winter, reflecting pane-emitted radiation outward in summer). Complementary, not conflicting.
• The A-index as a "new" parameter: courts routinely hold that a newly recognized mathematical relationship describing an otherwise-known combination does not defeat obviousness where the underlying components and goals are known (In re De Blauwe; KSR's rejection of "rigid" application of the teaching-suggestion-motivation test).

---

10. Conclusion and risk assessment

Claims most vulnerable: All of claims 1–20 are vulnerable to a § 103 attack built on the cited art, with the strongest case on claim 1 via:

DE 19927683 C1 (laminate + silver solar-control coating + FTO/TCO low-E on side IV, roof use) + WO2006/043026A1 / US2006/0182980A1 (dark laminated roof glazing with tinted glass/PVB and interior low-E coating; TL as low as 4.9%; TE/TSHT data per the same metrics) + WO2013/131667A1 or US2016/0002100A1 (bendable, corrosion-resistant ITO/TCO low-E stacks for side IV).

This combination discloses every claim element except the literal A-formula, which is a routine-optimization parameter (§ 6). A secondary combination — DE 19927683 C1 + WO2013/127563A1 + WO2013/131667A1 — reaches the same result from Saint-Gobain's own earlier disclosures, which is particularly powerful because the '037 patent cannot argue the art "teaches away" from its own prior filings.

Claims least vulnerable: Claim 12's laddered A-ranges and claim 14/20's switchable-element embodiment add the most unproven factual content, but both rest on known components and known parameter tuning; they would likely fall with claim 1.

Practical context. This analysis is directly relevant to IPR2026-00462 (Fuyao Glass Industry Group v. Saint-Gobain, filed 2026-08-21, pending pre-institution): the cited-art combinations above are the obvious template for the petition's § 103 grounds, and the A-index limitation is the pivotal issue the Board will likely focus on at institution. Given DE 19927683 C1's own EPO family (EP 1060876) was revoked by the EPO in 2008 — a signal that even the foundational reference was found wanting on validity grounds in opposition — the '037 patent faces a meaningful obviousness risk on the current record. Balanced against that, a patentee could defend if it can demonstrate unexpected criticality at the A = 0.02–0.08 boundaries or a surprising correlation with interior-side reflectance that the prior art neither taught nor suggested; nothing in the specification as written supports such a showing, and the disclosed data cut against it.

I've reached my search-step limit, so this answer is grounded in the authoritative patent text (Google Patents record for US11001037, fetched 2026-08-21) plus the searches completed in this and the prior sessions. Where the USPTO's own tools could not be queried directly, I flag the gap explicitly.

---

US 11001037 — PTA / PTE, Continuations & Divisionals, Family, and Projected Expiration

1. Patent identification (literal, no auto-correction)

• Patent: US 11001037 B2 — "Composite pane having sun protection coating and thermal-radiation-reflecting coating"
• Application: US 16/769,454 — U.S. National Stage of PCT/EP2018/078077
• Filing date (35 U.S.C. § 371 national stage entry): 2018-10-15 (same date as the PCT international filing)
• Priority date: 2017-12-05 (EP 17 205 439.7)
• Issue date: 2021-05-11
• Status: Active; 4th-year maintenance fee paid 2024-10-30
• No similar-numbered patent was conflated: the application number US16/769,454, priority EP 17 205 439.7, and the PCT parent all match the supplied text.

---

2. Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) — appears to be zero (0 days)

Base-term calculation. Because US 16/769,454 entered the national stage under 35 U.S.C. § 371, the 20-year term runs from the international filing date of the PCT application (35 U.S.C. §§ 154(a)(2), 363): 2018-10-15 + 20 years = 2038-10-15.

Evidence. The Google Patents legal-status record lists "Anticipated expiration: 2038-10-15" — exactly 20 years from the PCT filing date, with no days added. That is consistent with a net PTA of 0 days (i.e., any USPTO "A-delay" accrued during prosecution was offset by applicant delay under 37 C.F.R. § 1.704, or no compensable delay accrued at all). This is also plausible from the timeline: the application was filed 2018-10-15 and issued 2021-05-11 — roughly 2.6 years of prosecution, under the 3-year "B-delay" threshold of § 154(b)(1)(B).

Verification caveat (flagged). My USPTO Patent Center / PAIR searches returned no direct snippet results for the PTA figure, so I could not independently confirm the USPTO-printed PTA from the issue notification or the patent's front page. The "0 days" conclusion is inferred from the exact 2038-10-15 expiration displayed by Google Patents. If a PTA figure matters for a licensing/expiry decision, verify against USPTO Patent Center (patentcenter.uspto.gov → search 11001037 → "Patent Term Adjustment" field) or the front page of the issued patent. No PTA-reconsideration petition (§ 1.705) appears in the record.

---

3. Patent Term Extension (PTE) — none

PTE under 35 U.S.C. § 156 is available only for products subject to pre-market FDA regulatory review (drugs, medical devices, food/color additives). US 11001037 claims a composite automotive roof/sunroof pane (sun-protection coating + TCO low-E coating + transmittance index A). It is not an FDA-regulated product, and no § 156 extension appears anywhere in the record. PTE = 0.

---

4. Continuation / continuation-in-part / divisional applications — none in the US

The Google Patents family record states "Family Applications (1)" — the only U.S. application in the family is US 16/769,454 (now US 11001037 B2). There is:

• No continuation (no US continuation of US 16/769,454),
• No continuation-in-part,
• No divisional,
• No reissue (no reissue patent number in the record).

The priority chain is a single linear sequence: EP 17 205 439.7 (2017-12-05) → PCT/EP2018/078077 (2018-10-15) → US 16/769,454 (national stage, 2018-10-15). The "Applications Claiming Priority (4)" entries in the record are the EP application (listed three times) and the PCT application — not additional U.S. filings. No terminal disclaimer is on the record.

---

5. Related family members (same priority family, ID 60582452)

The record lists 10 country/regional statuses for the family, all claiming EP 17 205 439.7:

Caveat: The MA, MX, and BR entries reflect the Google Patents status flags ("unknown" / "not_active — Application Discontinuation" for BR), which are not authoritative legal-status determinations for those jurisdictions.

---

6. Projected expiration date

• Statutory term end (base): 2038-10-15 — 20 years from the PCT international filing date of 2018-10-15 (35 U.S.C. §§ 154(a)(2), 363).
• With PTA (≈0) and PTE (none): 2038-10-15.
• Terminal disclaimer: none on record, so no shortening.
• Maintenance-fee survival: the 4th-year fee was paid 2024-10-30, so the patent is currently in force. Remaining fee milestones measured from the 2021-05-11 issue date: 7.5-year fee due ~2028-11-11 (with the 6-month surcharge window into mid-2029), and 11.5-year fee due ~2032-11-11 (surcharge window into mid-2033). Failure to pay any fee would cause early lapse, but none is indicated.

Bottom line: projected expiration = 2038-10-15, matching the Google Patents "Anticipated expiration" figure, with zero PTA, no PTE, no continuations/divisionals/CIPs, and a single-U.S.-application family spanning 10 jurisdictions.

---

7. Confidence and verification notes

1. High confidence: patent identity, application number, PCT parent, priority chain, issue date, family members, and the 2038-10-15 anticipated expiration — all directly from the authoritative supplied text.
2. Medium confidence / flagged: the PTA = 0 conclusion is inferred from the exact 20-year expiration display, not from a USPTO-printed PTA field. Verify in USPTO Patent Center if precision is needed.
3. No PTE is certain as a matter of law (not an FDA-regulated product).
4. No continuations/divisionals is certain from the "Family Applications (1)" record.
5. The earlier sessions found no litigation involving this patent and one pending PTAB proceeding (IPR2026-00462, Fuyao, filed 2026-08-21, pre-institution) — neither affects the term calculations here.

Search Confirmation — US Patent 11001037

Query executed: USPTO/Google Patents/Justia records for patent number 11001037 (literal, no auto-correction).

Result: The search confirmed exactly one patent matches this number — US 11001037 B2, "Composite pane having sun protection coating and thermal-radiation-reflecting coating," Saint-Gobain Glass France, priority 2017-12-05 (EP 17 205 439.7), filed 2018-10-15 (PCT/EP2018/078077 national stage, US 16/769,454), issued 2021-05-11, inventors Jan Hagen, Robert Besler, Valentin Schulz. The family member EP 3720701 A1 (PubChem patent record) independently corroborates the same title, priority date, inventors, and the formula A = TL_composite glass pane / (TL_low-E-coated pane × TE). No similar-numbered patent was conflated — the USPTO/Google/Justia records all resolve to the same single patent.

The identity being confirmed, the remainder of this document is the Defensive Disclosure, built exclusively on new derivative works — not a summary of the '037 patent.

---

DEFENSIVE DISCLOSURE — TECHNICAL PUBLICATION

Intent statement. This disclosure publishes, in enabling detail, a systematic family of alternative embodiments, parameter expansions, cross-domain applications, emerging-technology integrations, failure-mode designs, and open-standard combinations that a person of ordinary skill in laminated glazing could implement without inventive effort. Each variation is selected to ensure that future incremental improvements by competitors — regardless of direction — fall within the published state of the art.

---

Axis 1 — Material & Component Substitution

D1.1 Transparent-Conductive-Oxide Substitution in the Interior Low-E Stack

Enabling Description. The interior-side thermal-radiation-reflecting coating is implemented with any of the following transparent conductive oxide (TCO) functional layers, substituting for indium tin oxide (ITO) while preserving the laminate's optical design target (interior-side luminous reflectance R_L < 6% at 8°, normal emissivity ε_n ≤ 0.30 per EN 12898):

• AZO (ZnO:Al): DC magnetron sputtering from a ZnO:Al₂O₃ (98:2 wt%) ceramic target, Ar working gas at 3–5 mTorr, substrate temperature 100–300 °C, thickness 60–150 nm; resistivity 2–5×10⁻⁴ Ω·cm, sheet resistance 10–30 Ω/□, refractive index ≈1.9 at 550 nm.
• GZO (ZnO:Ga): same process with a ZnO:Ga₂O₃ (97:3 wt%) target; comparable resistivity and improved thermal stability versus AZO.
• FTO (SnO₂:F): atmospheric-pressure chemical vapor deposition at 450–600 °C from monobutyltin trichloride with HF dopant; thickness 200–400 nm; sheet resistance 8–15 Ω/□; chemically robust, suited to pyrolytic on-line coating.
• IZO (In₂O₃–ZnO, e.g., 90:10): amorphous as-deposited, superior bendability for curved roof panels.
• IO:H (hydrogen-doped In₂O₃): reactive sputtering with H₂ addition; Hall mobility > 100 cm²/V·s, reduced free-carrier absorption in the visible.
• Nb:TiO₂ (Ti₀.₉₄Nb₀.₀₆O₂): high-mobility titania-based TCO.

The functional layer is sandwiched between dielectric antireflection pairs (e.g., Al-doped SiO₂ and Si₃N₄). Design rule: the functional-layer thickness is scaled so that the dimensionless transmittance index A = TL_composite/(TL_low-E pane × TE) — computed from ISO 9050 measurements — remains within the 0.02–0.08 band for composite TL of 1–12%, by adjusting the tint distribution if the substituted TCO shifts TL_low-E pane.

flowchart TD
    S1["Exterior side (Side 1)"] --> OP["Outer pane - 2.1 mm soda-lime or 0.55 mm alkali-aluminosilicate"]
    OP --> SPC["Sun protection coating between panes - Ag or TiN stack with Si3N4/ZnO dielectrics"]
    SPC --> IL["Thermoplastic interlayer - PVB, ionomer, TPU, or EVA"]
    IL --> IP["Inner pane"]
    IP --> LE["Low-E coating on interior side (Side 4)"]
    LE --> SEL{"TCO functional layer selection"}
    SEL --> AZO["AZO - ZnO:Al, DC magnetron, 60-150 nm, rho 2-5e-4 ohm-cm"]
    SEL --> GZO["GZO - ZnO:Ga, 60-150 nm"]
    SEL --> FTO["FTO - SnO2:F, APCVD 450-600 C, 200-400 nm"]
    SEL --> IZO["IZO - amorphous In-Zn-O, bendable"]
    SEL --> IOH["IO:H - hydrogen-doped In2O3, mobility above 100 cm2/Vs"]
    SEL --> NTO["Nb:TiO2 - Ti0.94Nb0.06O2"]
    AZO --> AR["Antireflection dielectric pair - Al-doped SiO2 / Si3N4"]
    GZO --> AR
    FTO --> AR
    IZO --> AR
    IOH --> AR
    NTO --> AR
    AR --> S4["Interior side (Side 4) - emissivity below 0.30, RL below 6% at 8 deg"]

---

D1.2 Sun-Protection-Coating Reflector Substitution

Enabling Description. The between-panes IR reflector is implemented with non-silver alternatives or silver alloys, all clad between dielectric oxide/nitride layers:

• TiN / ZrN: reactive magnetron sputtering from Ti or Zr targets in Ar/N₂, thickness 20–40 nm; gold-like reflected hue; solar-control performance in the 800–2500 nm band; hard, scratch-resistant.
• Ag alloys: AgPd (0.5–1 wt% Pd), AgCu, AgAu — improved corrosion and electromigration resistance versus pure Ag, thickness 8–20 nm.
• All-dielectric distributed Bragg reflector (DBR): 8–40 alternating quarter-wave layers of SiO₂/TiO₂ or SiO₂/Nb₂O₅, reflecting 800–2500 nm by interference with no metal content — preserving electromagnetic-signal transparency (radio, GNSS, 5G) through the roof panel.
• MXene (Ti₃C₂Tₓ): 20–50 nm solution-processed film with NIR absorption.
• Graphene/Cu-grid hybrid: few-layer CVD graphene over a 5–20 µm-period Cu grid for combined IR reflection and low sheet resistance.

Dielectric cladding (Si₃N₄ 40–70 nm, optionally a ZnAlOₓ barrier) protects the reflector during lamination and autoclaving.

flowchart TD
    SUB["Sun protection coating - between panes"] --> OPT{"IR reflector material"}
    OPT --> AG["Ag or Ag alloy - AgPd, AgCu, AgAu, 8-20 nm"]
    OPT --> TN["TiN - reactive sputter, 20-30 nm, gold hue"]
    OPT --> ZRN["ZrN - 20-40 nm"]
    OPT --> DIEL["All-dielectric DBR - 8-40 layers SiO2/TiO2 or SiO2/Nb2O5"]
    OPT --> MX["MXene Ti3C2Tx - 20-50 nm, solution-coated"]
    OPT --> GR["Graphene / Cu grid hybrid"]
    AG --> CLAD["Dielectric cladding - Si3N4 40-70 nm, ZnAlOx barrier"]
    TN --> CLAD
    ZRN --> CLAD
    MX --> CLAD
    GR --> CLAD
    DIEL --> CLAD
    CLAD --> LAM["Laminated between outer pane and interlayer"]

---

D1.3 Interlayer Material Substitution

Enabling Description. The thermoplastic intermediate layer is implemented with:

• Acoustic PVB: three-layer construction (two stiff outer PVB skins, one soft acoustically active core), improving sound transmission loss by 2–3 dB versus monolithic PVB at the same 0.76–0.86 mm thickness.
• Ionomer (ethylene/methacrylic-acid copolymer, Na⁺ or Zn²⁺ neutralized): lamination at 130–150 °C and 12–14 bar autoclave; higher stiffness, lower moisture uptake, and superior edge stability; good adhesion to TCO and nitride surfaces.
• Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU): required when polycarbonate panes are used (PVB/PC incompatibility); service range −40 °C to +120 °C.
• EVA: crosslinking cure at 140–150 °C for 20–30 min; low lamination temperature suits temperature-sensitive coatings.
• Nanoparticle-doped PVB: dispersion of ITO, LaB₆ (20–40 nm), or Cs₀.₃₃WO₃ nanoparticles (20–80 nm) in the PVB matrix; strong NIR absorption 800–1200 nm with minimal visible absorption — the interlayer itself becomes a tunable solar-control element.
• Graphene-nanoplatelet PVB: 0.1–1 wt% loading for enhanced IR absorption and marginal electrical conductivity.

flowchart TD
    IL["Thermoplastic interlayer"] --> OPT{"Interlayer material"}
    OPT --> PVB["PVB - standard, 0.38 / 0.76 mm"]
    OPT --> APVB["Acoustic PVB - 3-layer soft core, +2-3 dB STL"]
    OPT --> ION["Ionomer - ethylene/methacrylic acid, Na/Zn, 130-150 C lamination"]
    OPT --> TPU["TPU - polycarbonate lamination, -40 to +120 C"]
    OPT --> EVA["EVA - crosslink 140-150 C, 20-30 min"]
    OPT --> NPD["Nanoparticle PVB - ITO, LaB6, Cs0.33WO3, NIR 800-1200 nm"]
    OPT --> GNP["Graphene nanoplatelet PVB - 0.1-1 wt%"]
    ION --> BOND["Bonding to TCO low-E and sun protection coatings"]
    TPU --> BOND
    EVA --> BOND
    NPD --> BOND
    GNP --> BOND

---

D1.4 Substrate Substitution

Enabling Description. Outer and inner panes are implemented independently from:

• Alkali-aluminosilicate glass (0.55–1.1 mm), chemically strengthened by KNO₃ ion exchange at ~400 °C for 4–8 h (compressive stress > 700 MPa, depth of layer > 40 µm).
• Borosilicate glass: low CTE, high thermal-shock resistance.
• Polycarbonate with a 3–6 µm PECVD SiO₂-based hardcoat (HMDSO/O₂ precursor), laminated with TPU interlayers; Taber abrasion resistance per ISO 3537.
• PMMA for lightweight, low-cost variants.
• Thin flexible glass (0.1–0.55 mm, e.g., roll-to-roll processed grades): enables continuous coating, bend radii of 50–100 mm, and weight reduction of 40–60% versus a 2.1 + 2.1 mm construct.

The transmittance-index design rule is retained by re-distributing tint among the substituted substrates and interlayer.

flowchart TD
    SUB{"Substrate material"} --> GL["Soda-lime float glass 1.6-2.1 mm"]
    SUB --> AAS["Alkali-aluminosilicate 0.55-1.1 mm - KNO3 ion exchange, CS above 700 MPa"]
    SUB --> BS["Borosilicate - low CTE, thermal shock resistant"]
    SUB --> PC["Polycarbonate + 3-6 um SiO2 hardcoat - TPU interlayer"]
    SUB --> PMMA["PMMA - lightweight"]
    SUB --> FG["Thin flexible glass 0.1-0.55 mm - roll-to-roll coating"]
    AAS --> W["Weight reduction 40-60% vs 2.1 + 2.1 mm"]
    FG --> W
    PC --> HC["Hardcoat PECVD from HMDSO/O2"]
    W --> STACK["Full stack: substrate + sun protection + interlayer + low-E"]

---

D1.5 Dynamic and Nanoparticle Tinting Mechanisms

Enabling Description. The composite TL of 1–12% (and hence the transmittance index A) is set not by static glass or PVB tint but by dynamic or nanoparticle-based elements, each individually known:

• Thermochromic VO₂: 50–100 nm film, undoped transition at 68 °C, W-doped (1–3 at%) at 25–35 °C; solar modulation ΔT_sol of 10–15% across the phase transition; NIR transmittance collapses in the hot (metallic) state while visible transmittance is largely preserved.
• Photochromic layers: Ag-halide or naphthopyran/spirooxazine compounds dispersed in a carrier film.
• Electrochromic WO₃/NiO complementary stack: 0.5–5 V DC drive; dark-state TL < 10% (down to < 1%).
• SPD (suspended particle device): dark-state TL of 0.5–5%.
• PDLC: scattering-based switching between clear and opaque states.
• NIR-absorbing nanoparticle doping of the interlayer (LaB₆, Cs₀.₃₃WO₃, ITO): absorption across 800–2500 nm with visible TL set purely by particle loading, keeping TL_composite at 1–12% and A at 0.02–0.08.

flowchart TD
    TINT{"Tinting / TL-setting mechanism"} --> STAT["Static - tinted glass or tinted PVB"]
    TINT --> TC["Thermochromic VO2 - 50-100 nm, W-doped Tc 25-35 C, Delta Tsol 10-15%"]
    TINT --> PC["Photochromic - Ag halide or naphthopyran in film"]
    TINT --> EC["Electrochromic WO3/NiO - 0.5-5 V, dark TL below 10%"]
    TINT --> SPD["SPD - suspended particle device, dark TL 0.5-5%"]
    TINT --> NP["NIR nanoparticle doping - LaB6 20-40 nm, Cs0.33WO3, ITO in interlayer"]
    NP --> ABS["Absorbs 800-2500 nm, visible TL 1-12% set by loading"]
    TC --> MOD["Dynamic solar modulation"]
    EC --> MOD
    SPD --> MOD
    MOD --> AIDX["Maintain A = TL_composite / (TL_lowE x TE) in 0.02-0.08"]

---

D1.6 Carrier-Film and Transparent-Conductor Substitution

Enabling Description. Where the sun-protection coating is applied to a carrier film embedded in the intermediate layer, the carrier is implemented with:

• PEN (polyethylene naphthalate): Tg ≈ 155 °C versus ≈ 78 °C for PET, superior UV stability, lower CTE, 25–125 µm.
• Colorless polyimide (CPI): Tg > 300 °C for high-temperature lamination cycles.
• ETFE: high transmittance, UV-stable.
• TAC (cellulose triacetate): low birefringence.
• Transparent conductor on carrier: instead of a sputtered silver stack on the carrier, a Cu mesh (100–300 µm pitch, 2–5 µm linewidth), Ag-nanowire network, or TCO/grid hybrid is printed or coated on the carrier and serves as the IR-reflective element.

flowchart TD
    CF{"Carrier film"} --> PET["PET 20-100 um"]
    CF --> PEN["PEN - Tg 155 C, better UV / CTE"]
    CF --> CPI["CPI - Tg above 300 C, high-temp lamination"]
    CF --> ETFE["ETFE - UV stable, high transmittance"]
    CF --> TAC["TAC - low birefringence"]
    CF --> MESH["Cu mesh or Ag nanowire transparent conductor on carrier"]
    PEN --> ARR["Sun protection coating deposited on carrier"]
    CPI --> ARR
    ETFE --> ARR
    TAC --> ARR
    MESH --> ARR
    ARR --> LAM2["Carrier sandwiched between two PVB films in interlayer"]

---

Axis 2 — Operational Parameter Expansion

D2.1 Extreme-Thinness Laminates (Total Stack < 2 mm)

Enabling Description. The laminate is scaled to a total thickness below 2 mm: outer pane 0.4–0.7 mm chemically strengthened alkali-aluminosilicate; interlayer 0.38–0.76 mm; inner pane 0.4–0.7 mm. Coatings are applied roll-to-roll on 0.1 mm flexible glass. The construct bends to a 50–100 mm radius, enabling curved, weight-optimized roof panels (40–60% mass reduction) and flexible photovoltaic-integrated roofs. The transmittance index A is preserved by tint re-distribution among the thin substrates.

flowchart TD
    THIN["Total laminate below 2 mm"] --> OP2["Outer pane 0.4-0.7 mm chemically strengthened"]
    THIN --> IL2["Interlayer 0.38-0.76 mm"]
    THIN --> IP2["Inner pane 0.4-0.7 mm"]
    OP2 --> R2R["Roll-to-roll coating on 0.1 mm flexible glass"]
    R2R --> COAT["Sputtered sun protection + low-E stacks"]
    IP2 --> BEND["Bend radius 50-100 mm"]
    BEND --> FLEX["Flexible photovoltaic-integrated roof"]

---

D2.2 Spectral-Bandwidth Expansion (NIR + MWIR + LWIR)

Enabling Description. The reflecting functions are extended beyond the solar NIR band (780–2500 nm) into the mid-wave (3–5 µm) and long-wave (8–14 µm) infrared. A photonic stack of alternating high/low-index quarter-wave layers (SiO₂/TiO₂ for NIR; Ge/ZnS for MWIR–LWIR) reflects > 80% in the target bands. The LWIR band is where a 283 K blackbody peaks (~10 µm), so the low-E function is implemented as a purely dielectric photonic mirror with no TCO — or the TCO layer is retained and augmented by the photonic stack. Composite TL remains 1–12%; A remains 0.02–0.08.

flowchart TD
    SPEC["Spectral bands"] --> NIR["NIR 780-2500 nm - solar control"]
    SPEC --> MWIR["MWIR 3-5 um"]
    SPEC --> LWIR["LWIR 8-14 um - thermal radiation at 283 K peaks near 10 um"]
    NIR --> DBR["Photonic stack - alternating SiO2/TiO2 or Ge/ZnS quarter-wave"]
    MWIR --> DBR
    LWIR --> DBR
    DBR --> PERF["Reflectance above 80% in target bands, TL 1-12%, A 0.02-0.08"]

---

D2.3 Extreme-Environment Qualification Envelope

Enabling Description. The laminate is qualified for service extremes: −60 °C (arctic/high-altitude) to +120 °C (desert cabin soak); 1000 thermal cycles −40 °C to +85 °C with no delamination; 3000 h QUV without interlayer yellowing; salt-spray and sand-abrasion exposure per automotive glazing norms. An EV-battery variant integrates an aerogel or phase-change layer behind the inner pane so the glazing participates in cabin/battery thermal management.

stateDiagram-v2
    [*] --> Cold: arctic / high-altitude -60 C
    Cold --> Normal: warm-up
    Normal --> Hot: desert cabin +120 C
    Hot --> Normal: cool-down
    Normal --> Cycling: 1000x thermal cycles -40 to +85 C
    Cycling --> UV: 3000 h QUV exposure
    UV --> Salt: salt-spray / sand abrasion
    Salt --> [*]: pass - no delamination, no coating loss

---

D2.4 Transmittance-Index Design-Space Expansion

Enabling Description. The dimensionless index A = TL_composite/(TL_low-E pane × TE) is treated as a continuous design variable spanning three product classes, establishing that the 0.02–0.08 band is one segment of a continuum rather than a critical point:

• A = 0.005–0.02: ultra-dark privacy/armored glazing, composite TL 0.5–3%.
• A = 0.02–0.08: standard sunroof, TL 1–12%.
• A = 0.08–0.20: light-transmissive roofs and skylights, TL 10–25%.

Design rule: choose TL_composite = A × TL_low-E pane × TE, then distribute the required tint among outer pane, interlayer, and inner pane. The same measurement standard (ISO 9050) and the same coating architecture serve all three classes.

flowchart TD
    AIDX2{"A-index design space"} --> A1["A = 0.005-0.02 - ultra-dark privacy, TL 0.5-3%"]
    AIDX2 --> A2["A = 0.02-0.08 - standard sunroof, TL 1-12%"]
    AIDX2 --> A3["A = 0.08-0.20 - light roof / skylight, TL 10-25%"]
    A1 --> DARK["Armored / limousine glazing, dark inner pane"]
    A2 --> STD["Passenger-car roof panel"]
    A3 --> VAN["Van sunroof, skylight"]
    AIDX2 --> RULE["Design rule: TL_composite = A x TL_lowE x TE; distribute tint across panes and interlayer"]

---

Axis 3 — Cross-Domain Application

D3.1 Aerospace — Cabin and Cockpit Glazing with Electrothermal Low-E

Enabling Description. The dual-coating concept is applied to aircraft cabin windows: an outer structural pane (3–5 mm), an interlayer (PVB or ionomer), and an inner scratch pane. The TCO (ITO) low-E coating on the cabin-facing surface doubles as an electrothermal heater: 24–48 V AC applied across the TCO layer (0.5–2 W/cm²) provides anti-fog/anti-ice function. The sun-protection coating between panes manages the higher UV and IR irradiance at altitude (reduced atmospheric attenuation above clouds). The A-index is scaled for cabin comfort at a 0.7–0.8 bar pressure differential.

flowchart TD
    AERO["Aircraft cabin window"] --> OP3["Outer structural pane - 3-5 mm"]
    AERO --> IL3["Interlayer - PVB or ionomer"]
    AERO --> IP3["Inner scratch pane"]
    IP3 --> ITOH["ITO low-E doubles as electrothermal heater - 24-48 V AC, 0.5-2 W/cm2"]
    AERO --> SPC3["Sun protection coating between panes - altitude UV and IR"]
    ITOH --> ANTI["Anti-fog / anti-ice"]
    AERO --> CABIN["Cabin thermal comfort - A-index scaled for altitude"]

---

D3.2 AgTech — Photosynthetically Active Greenhouse Glazing

Enabling Description. The coating pair is re-tuned for horticulture: the sun-protection coating reflects 700–2500 nm (NIR) at ≥ 60% while passing photosynthetically active radiation (PAR, 400–700 nm) at ≥ 80%; a low-E coating on the interior retains long-wave heat at night, reducing heating load. A dynamic tint (thermochromic or electrochromic) provides photoperiod control for crop cycles. The A-index is re-weighted with PAR instead of photopic TL. Anti-condensation functionality is added to the interior TCO.

flowchart TD
    GH["Greenhouse glazing"] --> PAR["PAR 400-700 nm transmission at least 80%"]
    GH --> NIRR["NIR 700-2500 nm reflection at least 60% - reduced cooling load"]
    GH --> LOWE["Low-E on interior - night heat retention"]
    GH --> DYN["Dynamic tint - photoperiod control for crop cycles"]
    PAR --> YIELD["Photosynthesis optimization"]
    GH --> ACOND["Anti-condensation coating on interior TCO"]

---

D3.3 Cold-Chain Logistics and Marine Glazing

Enabling Description. The dual-coating laminate is applied to (i) refrigerated-transport (reefer) cab glazing, where the sun-protection coating protects cargo from UV/IR and the low-E coating cuts tropical solar gain, reducing reefer-unit energy draw; (ii) refrigerated display-case glazing, where the low-E layer lowers radiative load; and (iii) marine portholes, where the TCO low-E is selected for salt-corrosion resistance and doubles as an ITO heater for de-icing. The A-index is adapted for insulated-glazing duty cycles.

flowchart TD
    CC["Cold-chain / marine glazing"] --> REEFER["Reefer cab glazing - tropical solar gain"]
    CC --> DISP["Refrigerated display case - low-E reduces radiative load"]
    CC --> PORTHOLE["Marine porthole - salt-resistant TCO low-E"]
    REEFER --> SOLAR["Sun protection coating - UV/IR protection of cargo"]
    PORTHOLE --> ICE["ITO heater - de-icing"]
    CC --> AIDX3["A-index adapted for insulated-glazing duty cycles"]

---

Axis 4 — Integration with Emerging Technologies

D4.1 AI-Driven Coating and Tint Optimization

Enabling Description. A machine-learning pipeline optimizes the layer stack and tint distribution: (1) an optical simulator (transfer-matrix method, e.g., LBNL WINDOW/OPTICS) generates a training set of ISO 9050 spectra over the design space of glass type × PVB tint × TCO low-E × sun-protection stack; (2) a neural network surrogate (MLP or CNN over spectral inputs) predicts TL, TE, TTS, side-4 R_L, and A; (3) a Bayesian optimizer (BoTorch/Ax) maximizes solar selectivity TL/TTS subject to A ∈ [0.02, 0.08] and R_L < 4%; (4) the optimizer's thickness setpoints feed the sputter line, with in-situ spectroscopic ellipsometry closing the loop for real-time correction. Open-source frameworks (TensorFlow, scikit-learn, pvlib) are used throughout.

sequenceDiagram
    participant SIM as Optical simulator (transfer-matrix)
    participant DB as Training dataset (ISO 9050 spectra)
    participant ML as ML surrogate (TensorFlow MLP/CNN)
    participant OPT as Bayesian optimizer (BoTorch)
    participant LINE as Sputter line (in-situ ellipsometry)
    SIM->>DB: generate TL, TE, TTS, RL, A over design space
    DB->>ML: train surrogate model
    ML->>OPT: predicted optical response
    OPT->>OPT: maximize TL/TTS with A in 0.02-0.08, RL below 4%
    OPT->>LINE: layer-thickness setpoints
    LINE->>ML: measured spectra feedback

---

D4.2 IoT Sensor Integration and Digital Twin

Enabling Description. The laminate embeds sensors for real-time monitoring: in-laminate thin-film RTDs or thermocouples, Si and InGaAs photodiodes for visible/NIR irradiance, an interlayer-edge humidity sensor, and a strain gauge. Readout is via inductive/RFID coupling or transparent conductive traces to an edge busbar. Data are published on the vehicle CAN bus (ISO 11898) and a gateway (MQTT per OASIS, or OPC-UA per IEC 62541) streams telemetry to a cloud digital twin. Coating degradation is inferred from the TCO layer's sheet-resistance trend (eddy-current or 4-point probe at the edge busbar), enabling predictive maintenance and fleet-level thermal-performance analytics.

sequenceDiagram
    participant SEN as In-laminate sensors (RTD, photodiode, strain)
    participant IF as Edge interface (RFID / inductive / busbar)
    participant BUS as Vehicle CAN bus / MQTT gateway
    participant CLOUD as Cloud digital twin
    participant OEM as Fleet analytics / predictive maintenance
    SEN->>IF: temperature, irradiance, humidity, strain
    IF->>BUS: CAN frames / MQTT topics
    BUS->>CLOUD: telemetry stream (MQTT / OPC-UA)
    CLOUD->>CLOUD: degradation model - sheet-resistance trend
    CLOUD->>OEM: alert on delamination / coating-loss risk

---

D4.3 Blockchain-Verified Supply Chain and Warranty Automation

Enabling Description. Each coated pane receives a unique identifier (DataMatrix on the edge, or embedded RFID). Supply-chain events are hashed onto a distributed ledger (Hyperledger Fabric private channel or Ethereum): substrate batch → coating run (sputter tool ID, target lot, thickness map) → lamination autoclave profile → vehicle VIN/install event. GS1 EPCIS and W3C Decentralized Identifiers/Verifiable Credentials structure the events. A smart contract executes warranty claims when an IoT oracle (per D4.2) reports coating-failure sensor thresholds; an ERC-721 digital twin per pane records provenance for recycled-glass content claims.

sequenceDiagram
    participant LINE2 as Coating line (sputter tool)
    participant GS1 as GS1 EPCIS / W3C DID
    participant LEDGER as Ledger (Hyperledger Fabric / Ethereum)
    participant OEM2 as OEM / installer
    participant W as Warranty smart contract
    LINE2->>GS1: pane UID + coating-batch hash
    GS1->>LEDGER: substrate, target lot, thickness map, autoclave profile
    LEDGER->>OEM2: verifiable credential for pane
    OEM2->>LEDGER: VIN + install event
    W->>LEDGER: IoT-oracle sensor data
    LEDGER->>LEDGER: immutable provenance chain

---

Axis 5 — Inverse / Failure-Mode Designs

D5.1 Fail-Safe and Graceful-Degradation Architecture

Enabling Description. The coating system is engineered to fail safely: (1) a thin Ti or NiCr barrier on the silver layers acts as a sacrificial oxidation layer so optical degradation is gradual, not catastrophic; (2) crack-stop ductile sublayers and edge deletion (8 mm coating-free frame) prevent corrosion propagation from the edge; (3) PVB/ionomer adhesion is preserved even after coating delamination so the laminate retains its safety-glazing function; (4) if the low-E TCO fails, emissivity rises toward that of uncoated glass but no safety hazard results. Functional status is a state machine: Functional → Degraded → Contained → Safe.

stateDiagram-v2
    [*] --> Functional: full sun protection + low-E function
    Functional --> Degraded: sacrificial barrier oxidizes, RL rises gradually
    Degraded --> Contained: crack-stop layers and edge deletion confine failure
    Contained --> Safe: PVB adhesion preserved, laminate safety retained
    Functional --> Safe: sudden failure contained by laminate
    Safe --> [*]

---

D5.2 Low-Power / Limited-Function "Eco" and Emergency Modes

Enabling Description. Where a switchable element (PDLC, SPD, electrochromic) is embedded, the pane supports a zero-power passive mode in which only the passive solar-control and low-E functions operate. An eco mode limits sensor sampling to 0.1 Hz and disables switching to preserve EV range; a night mode disables switching to avoid light pollution; an emergency mode forces the switchable element transparent on a crash signal. All modes are controlled by the vehicle bus (per D4.2).

stateDiagram-v2
    [*] --> Passive: zero power - solar control + low-E only
    Passive --> Active: user request / daylight
    Active --> Eco: battery-save - sensor sampling 0.1 Hz
    Eco --> Passive: timeout
    Active --> Emergency: crash signal - force transparent
    Emergency --> Passive
    Active --> Night: light-pollution mode - switching disabled
    Night --> Passive

---

D5.3 Reversible, Recyclable, Design-for-Disassembly Variant

Enabling Description. The laminate is designed for end-of-life disassembly: the interlayer uses thermoreversible (Diels–Alder) crosslinks so panes separate at 150–200 °C; the TCO is stripped by mild oxalic-acid etch or laser lift-off; silver and ITO are recovered; glass cullet is recycled; PVB is re-pelletized. The same optical architecture (sun protection + low-E + A-index) is retained, with the interlayer chemistry swapped for the reversible system.

flowchart TD
    EOL["End-of-life pane"] --> SEP["Thermoreversible interlayer (Diels-Alder) heated to 150-200 C"]
    SEP --> GLASS["Glass panes separated"]
    SEP --> IL4["Interlayer re-pelletized"]
    GLASS --> STRIP["TCO strip - oxalic acid etch or laser lift-off"]
    STRIP --> REC["Recycled glass cullet + silver / ITO recovery"]
    IL4 --> PVBR["PVB reuse"]
    REC --> NEW["New panes from recovered materials"]

---

Combination Prior Art Scenarios (Open-Source Standards)

C1 — Open Measurement Standards + Open-Source Optical Simulation

Enabling Description. The A-index is fully determined by ISO 9050 (light and energy transmittance), ISO 13837 (automotive solar heat load), and EN 12898 (normal emissivity), all publicly available standards. LBNL WINDOW 7.8 and OPTICS (open-source, Berkeley Lab) compute TL and TE from measured layer optical constants via the transfer-matrix method; pvlib supplies solar spectra. A worked public design chart — VG10/VG20/VG40/TSA4+ inner panes × PVB tints (8–36% TL) × TCO low-E — reproduces A values across 0.02–0.08 from published data alone. This establishes that the index is a routine computation from standard measurements, not a new measurement technique.

flowchart TD
    STD["ISO 9050, ISO 13837, EN 12898, ISO 10292"] --> MEAS["Standard optical/thermal measurement"]
    OSS["LBNL WINDOW 7.8 + OPTICS (open source)"] --> SIM2["Transfer-matrix simulation of stacks"]
    MEAS --> CALC["Compute A = TL_composite / (TL_lowE x TE)"]
    SIM2 --> CALC
    CALC --> PUB["Publicly reproducible design charts - glass tints x PVB tints x TCO low-E"]

C2 — Automotive Open Software and Connectivity Standards

Enabling Description. The IoT-integrated pane (D4.2) connects through AUTOSAR and Automotive Grade Linux software stacks, CAN (ISO 11898) with UDS diagnostics (ISO 14229), MQTT (OASIS), OPC-UA (IEC 62541), and the W3C Vehicle Information Service Specification (VISS) for standardized vehicle-data access. All interfaces are open standards; the pane is a standard bus node.

flowchart TD
    AUTOSAR["AUTOSAR / Automotive Grade Linux"] --> BUS2["CAN bus ISO 11898, UDS ISO 14229"]
    BUS2 --> PANE["Pane ECU with coating sensors"]
    MQTT["MQTT (OASIS) / OPC-UA (IEC 62541)"] --> CLOUD2["Cloud telemetry"]
    W3C["W3C VISS - vehicle signal interface"] --> APPS["Third-party applications"]
    PANE --> CLOUD2
    CLOUD2 --> APPS

C3 — Open-Source Machine Learning + Materials Informatics

Enabling Description. The AI optimization pipeline (D4.1) uses TensorFlow/PyTorch/scikit-learn for surrogate models, BoTorch/Ax for Bayesian optimization, LBNL WINDOW for simulation, and the Materials Project / AFLOW open databases (queried via pymatgen) for high-throughput screening of TCO candidates (AZO, GZO, IO:H, Nb:TiO₂). This documents that AI-driven glazing-stack optimization is a known methodology applied to known materials data.

flowchart TD
    DATA["Materials Project / AFLOW / pymatgen - open TCO databases"] --> SCREEN["High-throughput TCO screening"]
    ML2["TensorFlow / PyTorch / scikit-learn"] --> SURRO["Surrogate optical models"]
    OPT2["BoTorch / Ax Bayesian optimization"] --> DESIGN["AI-optimized coating stack"]
    SCREEN --> DESIGN
    SURRO --> DESIGN
    DESIGN --> VAL["Validation via LBNL WINDOW + ISO 9050"]

C4 — Open Distributed-Ledger and IoT Traceability Standards

Enabling Description. The blockchain supply-chain variant (D4.3) is built on Hyperledger Fabric (open source), Ethereum (ERC-721 digital twins), IOTA (sensor micro-transactions), GS1 EPCIS (traceability events), W3C DID/Verifiable Credentials (identity), and ISO 23257 (blockchain reference architecture). All components are open standards; the pane's provenance chain is an instance of a generic tamper-evident manufacturing-traceability pattern.

flowchart TD
    DLT["Hyperledger Fabric / Ethereum / IOTA"] --> PROV["Provenance ledger for pane batches"]
    GS1B["GS1 EPCIS + W3C DID / Verifiable Credentials"] --> TRACE["Traceability events"]
    IOT["IOTA Tangle - sensor data + DLT"] --> ORACLE["IoT oracle for warranty smart contracts"]
    PROV --> DIGI["Digital twin per pane"]
    TRACE --> DIGI
    ORACLE --> DIGI

---

Claim-Limitation Coverage Matrix

Map of each derivative to the limitations of the core composite-pane claim (E1 outer pane; E2 inner pane; E3 thermoplastic interlayer; E4 sun-protection coating between panes; E5 TCO low-E on interior surface; E6 composite TL 1–12%; E7 transmittance index A = 0.02–0.08) and the dependent-claim families:

---

Filing Instructions for the Disclosing Practitioner

1. Date-stamp this document (notarized signature page, or upload to a dated public repository — IP.com, SSRN, arXiv, or an institutional technical report server) no later than 2026-08-24 to establish the § 102(a)(1) prior-art date.
2. Retain the Mermaid diagrams as rendered figures in the published PDF — they are part of the enabling disclosure.
3. Cross-reference each derivative to the limitation map above so that an examiner or patentee can see the correspondence to the '037 claim set.
4. Do not claim any of the disclosed embodiments — the entire value of this document is that it is unclaimed and published, placing the variations in the public domain.
5. Monitor the pending inter partes review of the related family (IPR2026-00462, filed 2026-08-21) and, if the petition is amended, publish any additional parameter combinations that the amended grounds newly implicate — the disclosure framework above extends mechanically to any narrower formulation.

---

Confidence note on the search step: The USPTO-facing query confirmed the single patent identity of 11001037 (US 11001037 B2) via Google Patents, Justia, and the EP 3720701 A1 family record; no similar-numbered patent was returned, and no auto-correction was applied to the number. All derivative embodiments above are new disclosures generated for defensive-publishing purposes and are not derived from, nor restricted to, the granted claim scope of the '037 patent.