Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/069,357

PRESSURE SENSING ASSEMBLY FOR A BICYCLE WHEEL

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 21, 2022
Examiner
CULLER, JILL E
Art Unit
2853
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sram LLC
OA Round
6 (Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
480 granted / 842 resolved
-11.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
877
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
60.3%
+20.3% vs TC avg
§102
22.0%
-18.0% vs TC avg
§112
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 842 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-6, 9 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burkard, et al. (WO 8900511, hereafter Burkard) in view of Ito et al. (US 6,959,597, hereafter Ito) With respect to claim 1, Burkard teaches a pressure sensing assembly (tire pressure sensor 13) configured to be attached to a wheel (wheel 10) having a tire (tire 11) and a rim (wheel rim 12) mounted on the tire, the pressure sensing assembly comprising: a pressure transmitting member (electrically conductive membrane 20); a sensing chamber (reference pressure chamber 18) defined by the pressure transmitting member and fluidly isolated from an interior of the tire; a housing (housing 29); and a sensing element (oscillating circuit 23) located within the housing; wherein the sensing element is fluidly isolated from the sensing chamber (by ball 36) and the housing is attachable to the rim. (translation, pgs. 3-4, Fig. 3) Burkard does not explicitly teach a printed circuit board within the housing or a wireless communicator coupled to the printed circuit board within the housing. Ito teaches a pressure sensing assembly (transmitter 3) configured to be attached to a bicycle wheel (wheel 5) having a tire (tire 2) and a rim (rim 5a) mounted the tire, the pressure sensing assembly comprising: a pressure transmitting member; a sensing chamber defined by the pressure transmitting member; a housing (casing 10); a sensing element located within the housing; a printed circuit board within the housing; and a wireless communicator coupled to the printed circuit board within the housing, and the housing is attachable to the rim. (col. 3, lines 30-51, Figs. 5-6) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the structure of Burkard to include a printed circuit board, as taught by Ito, in order to provide the communication circuitry in a well-known and effective manner. With respect to claim 2, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches the pressure transmitting member (electrically conductive membrane 20) comprises a deflecting member. (Burkard, pgs. 3-4, Fig. 3) With respect to claim 3, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches wherein the deflecting member has a convex outer surface. (Burkard, Fig. 3, although this is not shown in the figure, the shape could be convex dependent upon the difference between internal and external pressures) With respect to claim 4, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches wherein the pressure transmitting member is movable responsive to pressure changes in the tire. (Burkard, pgs. 3-4) With respect to claim 5, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches wherein the sensing element is disposed on the printed circuit board. (Ito, col. 3, lines 30-51, Figs. 5-6) With respect to claim 6, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches wherein the wireless communicator is configured to transmit data indicative of the sensed pressure of the tire. (Ito, col. 3, lines 30-51, Figs. 5-6) With respect to claim 9, Burkard teaches a wheel (wheel 10), comprising: a rim (wheel rim 12); a tire (tire 11) mounted to a tire bed of the rim; a pressure sensing assembly (tire pressure sensor 13) attachable to the rim, the pressure sensing assembly (tire pressure sensor 13) comprising: a pressure transmitting member (electrically conductive membrane 20); a sensing chamber (reference pressure chamber 18) defined by the pressure transmitting member and fluidly isolated from an interior of the tire; a housing (housing 29); a sensing element (oscillating circuit 23) located within the housing, wherein the sensing element is fluidly isolated from the sending chamber (by ball 36) and the housing is attachable to the rim. (translation, pgs. 3-4, Fig. 3) Burkard does not explicitly teach a printed circuit board within the housing or a wireless communicator coupled to the printed circuit board within the housing. Ito teaches a bicycle wheel (wheel 5), comprising: a rim (rim 5a); a tire (tire 2) mounted to a tire bed of the rim; a pressure sensing assembly (transmitter 3) attachable to the rim, the pressure sensing assembly comprising: a pressure transmitting member; a sensing chamber defined by the pressure transmitting member; a housing (casing 10); a sensing element located within the housing; a printed circuit board within the housing; and a wireless communicator coupled to the printed circuit board within the housing, and the housing is attachable to the rim. (col. 3, lines 30-51, Figs. 5-6) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the structure of Burkard to include a printed circuit board, as taught by Ito, in order to provide the communication circuitry in a well-known and effective manner. With respect to claim 11, although Burkard, as modified by Ito, does not explicitly teach wherein the tire is tubeless, it is well known to use this type of pressure sensor with a tubeless tire and therefore this use would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed. With respect to claim 12, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches wherein the pressure transmitting member has a curved outer surface, and wherein the pressure transmitting member is movable responsive to pressure changes in the tire. (Burkard, pgs. 3-4, Fig. 3, although this is not shown in the figure, the shape could be convex dependent upon the difference between internal and external pressures) With respect to claim 13, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches a power source coupled to the printed circuit board. (Ito, col. 3, lines 47-51) With respect to claim 14, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches wherein the wireless communicator is coupled to the printed circuit board and configured to transmit data indicative of the pressure of the tire. (Ito, col. 3, lines 30-51) Claim(s) 7 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burkard, in view of Ito, as applied above, and further in view of Huang. (US 7,196,616) With respect to claim 7, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches all that is claimed, as in the above rejection. Burkard, as modified by Ito, does not teach a light-emitting element coupled to the printed circuit board, the light-emitting element configured to emit light indicative of the sensed pressure of the tire. Huang teaches a tire pressure sensing assembly comprising a light-emitting element (flash warning device 94) coupled to a printed circuit board (circuit board 92), the light-emitting element configured to emit light indicative of the sensed pressure of the tire. (col. 8, lines 8-14, Figs. 7-8) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to further modify the structure of Burkard to include a light-emitting element, as taught by Huang, in order to indicate the status of the tire pressure directly to a user. With respect to claim 15, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches all that is claimed, as in the above rejection except for a light-emitting element coupled to the printed circuit board, the light-emitting element configured to emit light indicative of the pressure of the tire. Huang teaches a tire pressure sensing assembly comprising a light-emitting element (flash warning device 94) coupled to a printed circuit board (circuit board 92), the light-emitting element configured to emit light indicative of the sensed pressure of the tire. (col. 8, lines 8-14, Figs. 7-8) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to further modify the structure of Burkard to include a light-emitting element, as taught by Huang, in order to indicate the status of the tire pressure directly to a user. With respect to claim 16, although Burkard, as modified by Ito and Huang, does not explicitly teach a light pipe coupled to the light- emitting element and a lens coupled to the light pipe, wherein the lens extends through an opening formed in the rim, such that light emitted by the light-emitting element is visible, this is a common structure used to transmit light from a light-emitting element on a circuit board and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to further modify the structure to include these elements in order to make the signal easily visible to an external user. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burkard, in view of Ito, as in the above rejection, and further in view of Dammen et al. (US 9,927,314, hereafter Dammen) With respect to claim 8, Burkard, as modified by Ito, teaches all that is claimed, as in the above rejection, except for explicitly teaching an incompressible fluid disposed in the sensing chamber. However, it is well known to include an incompressible fluid in a sensing chamber. For example, Dammen teaches a pressure sensing assembly comprising an incompressible fluid disposed in the sensing chamber. (col. 1, lines 16-26; col. 3, lines 15-21) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to further modify the structure of Burkard to include an incompressible fluid, as taught by Dammen, in order to relay the external pressure in a consistent and protective manner. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed December 18, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the sensing element of Burkard is not fluidly isolated from the sensing chamber because pins 22 and 24, which are partially located within the reference pressure chamber 18, are a part of the sensing element. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Although these pins are used to transmit an indication of the deflection of the conductive membrane, they cannot ‘sense’ the pressure until they are connected at the oscillating circuit. Because that circuit, 23, is fluidly isolated from the pressure chamber, this is considered sufficient to teach applicant’s claimed limitation. In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Ito clearly teaches the cited limitation of a printed circuit board within the housing and a wireless communicator coupled to the printed circuit board within the housing. If, as applicant argues, Burkard already contains a printed circuit board, then the combination would be reasonable to include the wireless communicator in order to realize the advantages of wireless communication. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jill E Culler whose telephone number is (571)272-2159. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JILL E CULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 20, 2023
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 28, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 12, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 17, 2025
Response Filed
May 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 18, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601726
METHANE MONITORING APPARATUS AND SYSTEM FOR STEREOSCOPIC AND REAL-TIME METHANE MONITORING OF OCEAN PROFILE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590537
PIEZOELECTRIC LEAF CELL SENSOR ARRAY FOR MULTIPHASE GAS-OIL-WATER FLOW METERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12560516
FRICTION TEST DEVICE BASED ON TORSIONAL HOPKINSON BAR (THB)
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12558929
Sensor for Tires
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554042
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR HIGH SPEED SONIC TEMPERATURE AND AIRSPEED MEASUREMENTS FOR INPUTS TO AN AIR DATA SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
57%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+13.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 842 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month