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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the acronym “SP” of “SP value” as recited throughout the specification is not defined. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The recitation of “SP” in claim 2 (in “SP value”) is not defined, but it is examiner’s interpretation that “SP” here refers to “solubility parameter”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 6 recites “ the mass average molecular weight of the polymer constituting the polymer binder (B1) is 200,000 or more ”; however, claim 1 (upon which claim 6 depends) recites “ a mass average molecular weight of a polymer constituting the polymer binder (B1) is 100,000 to 2,000,000 ”. Therefore, the metes and bounds of claim 6 are unclear because the mass average molecular weight ranges for B1 are divergent in claim 1 versus claim 6 (only abutting at 200,000). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1, 3, and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo et al. ( US 2013 / 0142943 A1 ) in view of Lee et al. ( US 2020 / 0373540 A1 – hereinafter “Lee ‘540” ), Medlege et al. ( US 2010 / 0092871 A1) , Yamada et al. ( US 2015 / 0171431 A1) , and Takahashi et al. ( US 2003 / 0143465 A1 ). Regarding claim 1, Kubo teaches a n electrode composition ( electrode composition , [ 0012, 0027]) comprising: an inorganic solid electrolyte (SE) ( solid electrolytes 2 , [0027] and Fig. 2; inorganic options in [0034]) having an ion conductivity of a metal belonging to Group 1 or Group 2 of the periodic table (lithium-ion conductivity of the electrode / electrolyte / resultant lithium-ion secondary battery, [ 0003- 000 4, 0032]) ; an active material (AC) ( active materials 1 , [0027] and Fig. 2) ; a conductive auxiliary agent (CA) ( a conductive material to improve conductivity may be mixed in together with the active material, the solid electrolyte, the binder, and the solvent, to make a slurry-form electrode composition ; [0037]) ; a polymer binder (B) ( binder 3 , [0027] and Fig. 2; a binder having an amine group introduced into the terminal of hydrogenated butadiene rubber may be employed as the binder , [0016-0017]; other polymeric binder examples of acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (ABR), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), etc. per [0035]) ; and a dispersion medium (D) ( a good solvent for the binder is used in the slurry-form electrode composition , in which active material / solid electrolyte / binder can be uniformly dispersed; [0027]) , wherein the polymer binder (B) includes a polymer binder (B1) that is dissolved in the dispersion medium (D) ( the “good solvent for the binder” refers to a solvent in which the solubility of the binder is 5% or more , [0013]) , and the polymer binder (B1), the inorganic solid electrolyte (SE), the active material (AC), and the conductive auxiliary agent (CA) satisfy the following condition … (3): (3) a content of the polymer binder (B1) in a total solid content is 1.5% by mass or less (in [0043] cathode composition: weight ratio of “active material:sulfide solid electrolyte=75:25” , 1.5 parts of the binder relative to 100 parts of the active material, and 3.0 parts of the conductive additive relative to 100 parts of the active material ; in [0045] cathode composition: weight ratio of “active material:sulfide solid electrolyte=58:42 ” , binder weighed so as to obtain 1.1 parts of thereof relative to 100 parts of the active material ; therefore, in both exemplary [0043, 0045] compositions, the binder was ≤ 1.5% by weight of the total solids ) . Kubo fails to teach that the polymer binder (B1), the inorganic solid electrolyte (SE), the active material (AC), and the conductive auxiliary agent (CA) satisfy conditions (1), (2), (4): (1) a mass average molecular weight of a polymer constituting the polymer binder (B1) is 100,000 to 2,000,000, (2) a value of a polarity element of surface energy of the polymer constituting the polymer binder (B1) is 0.5 mJ /m 2 or more, (4) a total product of a specific surface area and a content mass fraction of each of the inorganic solid electrolyte (SE), the active material (AC), and the conductive auxiliary agent (CA) is 5.0 to 15.0 m 2 /g. Lee ‘540 is analogous in the art of polymer binders used in batteries and teaches in [0088] that: F or example, the first binder polymer may have a weight average molecular weight (Mw) of 10,000-600,000, or 100,000-600,000. When the first binder polymer has an excessively high weight average molecular weight, it shows low solubility and the binder solution has excessively increased viscosity, thereby making it difficult to carry out coating (application). When the first binder polymer has an excessively low weight average molecular weight, it is difficult to obtain a uniform coating layer. Therefore, Lee ‘540 teaches the Mw of a first polymer binder being a result-effective variable which affects coating difficulty and uniformity, teaching a preferable range of 100,000-600,000 as cited above. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply such teaching to modify Kubo and optimize the ease and uniformity of the coating (i.e., of the electrode composite dispersion including the binder polymer) by ensuring the mass average molecular weight of the polymer constituting said polymer binder was in the range taught toward by Lee, which falls within the claimed range of 100,000 to 2,000,000 in condition (1) (see MPEP 2144.05 II and I). Medlege is analogous in the art of b inder s for an electrode and teaches in [0055] that: p referably, the first polymer is a hydroxylated, preferably highly hydroxylated, polymer which can have a strong polar component thus guaranteeing a high surface energy close to 50 mJ /m 2 , so as to ensure good adhesion to the current collector . Kubo at [0026, 0038] also teaches toward application of the electrode composition to a current collector . A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious, in view of the teaching of Medlege , to modify Kubo to ensure that the first polymer was hydroxylated to have strong polar component , thus guaranteeing a high surface energy close to 50 mJ /m 2 and achieving good adhesion to the current collector . The surface energy of close to 50 mJ /m 2 falls within the claimed range of “ 0.5 mJ /m 2 or more ”, thus satisfying condition (2) (see MPEP 2144.05 I). Yamada is analogous in the art of solid electrolytes and teaches solid electrolyte may include a sulfide-based compound (Yamada [0074]), similar to the Kubo teaching that it is preferable to employ the sulfide solid electrolyte (Kubo [0034]). Yamada teaches in [0078] that: the sulfide-based compound may have a specific surface area of for example, at least about 1 m 2 /g. When the specific surface area of the solid electrolyte is large, an area of the interface between the solid electrolyte and the electrode active material may increase. Ion conduction path also may be improved . Takahashi is also analogous in the art of solid electrolyte cells (title) and teaches a composite material composed of LiFePO 4 and the carbo n composite material used as cathode active material, which is comprised of numerous grains of the carbon material attached to the surface of the LiFePO 4 grains , wherein the carbon materials exhibit electrical conductivity ([0032]). Takahashi teaches in [0033] that carbon content per unit weight of the LiFePO 4 carbon composite material is desirably not less than 3 wt % in order to achieve favorable effect in improving the electronic conductivit y. Further, Takahashi teaches in [0042] that: The Bullnauer Emmet Teller (BET) specific surface area of the LiFePO 4 carbon composite material is preferably not less than 10.3 m 2 /g. If the BET specific surface area of LiFePO 4 carbon composite material is not less than 10.3 m 2 /g, the specific surface area of LiFePO 4 per unit area can be sufficiently large to increase the contact area of LiFePO 4 with the carbon material. The result is the improved electronic conductivity of the cathode active material. Based on the Takahashi data in [0033, 0042]: the weight% of conductive carbon additive is 3% = 0.03 such that the weight% of LiFePO 4 would be 97% = 0.97 in this composite cathode material. Given the specific surface area of 10.3 m 2 /g , the “ product of a specific surface area and a content mass fraction of each of … the active material (AC), and the conductive auxiliary agent (CA) ” is 0.97*10.3 m 2 /g = 9.991 for the AC and 0.03* 10.3 m 2 /g = 0.309 m 2 /g for the CA ( within the composite material of Takahashi ) . In Kubo inventive examples, the following data is given. In Kubo [0043] cathode composition: weight ratio of “active material:sulfide solid electrolyte=75:25” , 1.5 parts of the binder relative to 100 parts of the active material, and 3.0 parts of the conductive additive relative to 100 parts of the active material ; in Kubo [0045] cathode composition: weight ratio of “active material:sulfide solid electrolyte=58:42 ” , binder weighed so as to obtain 1.1 parts of thereof relative to 100 parts of the active material . The 3.0 parts of the conductive additive relative to 100 parts of the active material agrees with Takahashi [0033] teaching cited above. For the sake of the following calculation, the Kubo [0045] cathode composition: weight ratio of “active material:sulfide solid electrolyte=58:42 ” will be used since Takahashi teaches toward the specific surface area of composite cathode particles: Using Yamada teaching of solid sulfide electrolyte having specific surface area of 1 m 2 /g , and a mass fraction of sulfide solid electrolyte being 42% = 0.42 (per Kubo [0045] “active material:sulfide solid electrolyte=58:42 ”), the “ product of a specific surface area and a content mass fraction of … the inorganic solid electrolyte (SE) ” would be 0.42*1 m 2 /g = 0.42 m 2 /g for the SE component . Combining the Takahashi-based calculation (three paragraphs above, within the present Office action) with the Kubo [0045] teaching of 58% = 0.58 mass fraction of active material within the active material-solid sulfide electrolyte composite, the “ product of a specific surface area and a content mass fraction of each of … the active material (AC), and the conductive auxiliary agent (CA) ” becomes: 0.58*0.97*10.3 m 2 /g = 5.79 m 2 /g for the AC component and 0.58*0.03* 10.3 m 2 /g = 0.18 m 2 /g for the CA component . Therefore, “ a total product of a specific surface area and a content mass fraction of each of the inorganic solid electrolyte (SE), the active material (AC), and the conductive auxiliary agent (CA) ” would equal the sum of 0.42 m 2 /g (for SE) + 5.79 m 2 /g (for AC) + 0.18 m 2 /g (for CA) = 6.39 m 2 /g (which falls within the instantly claimed range of 5.0 to 15.0 m 2 /g , thus satisfying condition (4)). It would have been obvious of a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Kubo to have the specific surface areas as taught by Yamada (for the solid sulfide electrolyte) so that an area of the interface between the solid electrolyte and the electrode active material was increase d and i on conduction path was improved , and as taught by Takahashi (for the composite active material and conductive additive) in order to increase the contact area therebetween and result i n improved electronic conductivity of the composite electrode active material. Thus, per the above exemplary calculations, instant condition (4) becomes satisfied. Thereby, all limitations of claim 1 rendered obvious by modified Kubo. Regarding claim 3, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and wherein the value of the polarity element is 1.0 mJ /m 2 or more ( high surface energy close to 50 mJ /m 2 , Medlege [0055] as applied to modified Kubo in regards to claim 1 above). Regarding claim 8, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and An electrode sheet ( The cathode current collector and the anode current collector may be in a foil-shaped, Kubo [0038]) for an all-solid state secondary battery, comprising: an active material layer formed of the electrode composition ( the slurry-form electrode composition is applied onto a cathode current collector or an anode current collector , Kubo [0038]) according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Regarding claim 9, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and An all-solid state secondary battery (a solid battery, Kubo abstract and [0009-0010]) comprising, in the following order: a positive electrode active material layer; a solid electrolyte layer; and a negative electrode active material layer ( a solid electrolyte layer is formed through the step of applying a slurry-form electrolyte composition containing a solid electrolyte over the surface of the cathode or anode; they are stacked such that the solid electrolyte layer is sandwiched by the cathode and the anode ; Kubo [0038, 0047]) , wherein at least one layer of the positive electrode active material layer ( a slurry-form cathode composition made in S1 using a cathode active material is applied over a surface of the cathode current collector in S2 ; Kubo [0038]) or the negative electrode active material layer ( a slurry-form anode composition made in S1 using an anode active material is applied over a surface of an anode current collector in S2 ; Kubo [0038]) is an active material layer formed of the electrode composition according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Regarding claim 10, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above and A manufacturing method for an electrode sheet for an all-solid state secondary battery ( a method for producing an electrode for a solid battery , Kubo Abstract) , the manufacturing method comprising: forming a film of the electrode composition ( applying the slurry-form electrode composition that has been made onto a base material and drying the slurry-form electrode composition that has been applied ; Kubo [0026-0027]) according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Regarding claim 11, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 10 above and A manufacturing method for an all-solid state secondary battery ( Manufacturing of a Solid Battery , Kubo [0046]) , the manufacturing method comprising: manufacturing an all-solid state secondary battery (stacking of the produced electrodes with electrolyte layer between, Kubo [0038, 0047]) through the manufacturing method according to claim 10 (see rejection of claim 1 0 above). Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo et al. ( US 2013 / 0142943 A1 ) in view of Lee et al. ( US 2020 / 0373540 A1 – hereinafter “Lee ‘540” ), Medlege et al. ( US 2010 / 0092871 A1) , Yamada et al. ( US 2015 / 0171431 A1) , and Takahashi et al. ( US 2003 / 0143465 A1 ) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al. ( US 2014 / 0023921 A1 – hereinafter “Lee ‘ 921 ” ). Regarding claim 2, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above but fails to teach that the dispersion medium (D) has an SP value of 17 to 22 MPa 1/2 . Lee ‘921 is analogous in the art of electrode active material layer mixtures including binder polymer (Abstract) and teaches that the binder polymer has a solubility parameter of more preferable 15 to 25 MPa 1/2 ([0056]) and teaches that It is preferred that the solvent of the second binder polymer (i.e. the second solvent) has a solubility parameter similar to that of the second binder polymer to be used and a low boiling point, so as to achieve uniform mixture and easy removal of the solvent afterward ([0058]). Kubo also teaches toward the good solvent for the binder easily dissolving the binder (Kubo [0013, 0030]) and having a relatively low boiling point in order to evaporate and make it possible to easily produce an electrode for a solid battery which can improve performance of the solid battery (Kubo [0030]). In view of Lee ‘ 921 [0056, 0058] as cited above, the solubility parameter (i.e., SP value) of the solvent (i.e., dispersion medium) is a variable which, relative to that of the SP value of the binder, affects the ability of the dispersion medium to effectively dissolve the binder which affects the resultant ease of production and performance of the electrode and overall battery. Thus, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to ensure that the SP value of the dispersion medium within modified Kubota was in a preferable range (e.g., binder polymer has a solubility parameter of more preferable 15 to 25 MPa 1/2 ) in addition to having a low boiling point as taught toward by Lee ‘ 921 , in order to effectively dissolve the binder to a desirable amount in order to easily produce the battery as also taught toward by Kubo. See MPEP 2144.05 I-II regarding obviousness of overlapping ranges and routine optimization. Thereby, claim 2 is rendered obvious. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo et al. (US 2013/0142943 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0373540 A1 – hereinafter “Lee ‘540” ), Medlege et al. (US 2010/0092871 A1), Yamada et al. (US 2015/0171431 A1), and Takahashi et al. (US 2003/0143465 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hideki et al. (JP-2019009124-A, cited in the 10/19/2023 IDS, with a machine translation attached to the present Office action and used for line citations below) . Regarding claim 4 , modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above but fails to teach the polymer constituting the polymer binder (B1) contains a constitutional component having a substituent having 8 or more carbon atoms, as a side chain. Kubo does teach in [0016-0017] does teach that the binder having an amine group introduced into the terminal of hydrogenated butadiene rubber (i.e., a side chain). Hideki is analogous in the art of coated active material for a lithium ion battery (line 15) and teaches such active material coating contains polymerizable monomers (lines 169-173) and teaches toward ester compounds (Hideki compounds a1-1 and a1-2) having a linear or branched alkyl group (R2, as a side chain) with 8 to 24 carbon atoms (lines 189-199). The above-cited Hideki ester compound examples satisfy one of their four inventive conditions of the polymeric coating resin (per lines 94-97, 169-198), which contributes to the coated active materials exhibiting superior cycle characteristics (per lines 1232-1235). Hideki generally teaches that in order to solve the problem of provid ing a coated active material for a lithium ion battery excellent in energy density and cycle characteristics (lines 71-75) wherein the coating includes a radical polymerizable monomer (A) that contains an ester compound (a1 ) represented by the following general formula (1) : CH2=C(R1)COOR2 , wherein R1 is a hydrogen atom Or a methyl group, and R2 is a linear or branched alkyl group having 8 to 24 carbon atoms (lines 82-87). A person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to further modify the polymer binder of Fubo , as coated/combined with the active material thereof, to include a linear or branched alkyl group as a side chain having 8 to 24 carbon atoms , with the motivation to promote superior cycle characteristics of the resultant battery as taught toward by Hideki, Thereby, claim 4 is rendered obvious . Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo et al. (US 2013/0142943 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0373540 A1 – hereinafter “Lee ‘540” ), Medlege et al. (US 2010/0092871 A1), Yamada et al. (US 2015/0171431 A1), and Takahashi et al. (US 2003/0143465 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang et al. ( US 2012 / 0189911 A1 ). Regarding claim 5 , modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above but fails to teach the polymer binder (B) includes a polymer binder (B2) composed of a polymer having a molecular weight different from that of the polymer binder (B1). Lee ‘540 , as applied to modified Kubo in the rejection of claim 1 above, teaches a plurality of inorganic particles and a binder polymer positioned on the whole or a part of the surface of the inorganic particles to connect the inorganic particles with one another and fix them , wherein the binder polymer comprises a first binder polymer and a second binder polymer ([0052-0053]). Kubo teaches their binder serving a similar function in that the binder fixes together the inorganic solid electrolyte material, active material, and conductive material as well as fixes such slurry to a collector (Kubo Fig. 2 and [0027, 0037-0038]). Lee ‘540 teaches in [0088, 0090] that each of the first and second binder polymers can have weight average molecular weight of 10,000-600,000 . Lee ‘540 [0088] also teaches that: W hen the first binder polymer has an excessively high weight average molecular weight, it shows low solubility and the binder solution has excessively increased viscosity, thereby making it difficult to carry out coating (application). When the first binder polymer has an excessively low weight average molecular weight, it is difficult to obtain a uniform coating layer. Lee ‘540 [0090] similarly teaches that: When the second binder polymer has an excessively high weight average molecular weight, it shows low solubility and the binder solution has excessively increased viscosity, thereby making it difficult to carry out coating (application). When the second binder polymer has an excessively low weight average molecular weight, it is difficult to obtain a uniform coating layer . Therefore, Lee ‘540 teaches that the two polymer binder molecular weights can be independent from on e another and are result-effective variables affecting the ease and uniformity of slurry coating. Kang is analogous in the art of binder s, teaching a binder for an electrode of a secondary battery exhibiting excellent adhesive force (Title), and teaches said binder including polymer particles in which two or more types of monomers are polymerized with two or more types of cross-linking agents with mutually different molecular weights (Abstract). Kang teaches the binder having a combination specific ingredients fundamentally improves electrode stability, starting from the manufacturing process of an electrode, to thereby provide a secondary battery with excellent cycle characteristics (Abstract), and specifically that the binder for an electrode of a secondary batter, which includes polymer particles formed by polymerization of two types or more of monomers with two types or more of cross-linking agents having different molecular weights, may increase adhesiveness while contributing to improvement in cycle characteristics of a battery ([0013-0014, 0022, 0060]). Therefore, in view of both Lee ‘540 and Kang teaching toward a polymer binder including two types of polymers (i.e., made from two types of monomers) specifically exhibiting two different molecular weights, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to further modify Kubo such that polymer binder (B) includes a polymer binder (B2) composed of a polymer having a molecular weight different from that of the polymer binder (B1) in order to achieve the advantages taught toward by Lee ‘540 and Kang (i.e., better fixing together of particles, tailored solubility and viscosity for ease and uniformity of coating, and increase of adhesiveness to improv e cycle characteristics of the resultant battery ). Thereby, claim 5 is rendered obvious. Regarding claim 6, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 5 above but fails to yet explicitly teach wherein the mass average molecular weight of the polymer constituting the polymer binder (B1) is 200,000 or more, and a mass average molecular weight of the polymer constituting the polymer binder (B2) is 200,000 or less. However, as cited in regards to claims 1 and 5 above, Lee ‘540 teaches that both the first and second binder polymers may have a weight average molecular weight (M w ) of 10,000-600,000, or 100,000-600,000 ([0088, 0090]). In view of this teaching, and since Kang (as cited in regards to claim 5 above) teaches the binder for an electrode of a secondary battery polymer particles in which two or more types of monomers are polymerized with two or more types of cross-linking agents with mutually different molecular weights in order to give excellent adhesive force cycle characteristics (title, abstract, [0013-0014, 0022, 0060]), a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to tailor the mass average molecular weight s of the two different polymeric components of the binder to be mutually different as taught by Kang, such as on opposite ends of the range of Lee ‘540. The upper end of the range in Lee ‘540 reads on “ 200,000 or more ” while the lower end reads on “ 200,000 or less”. (See MPEP 2144.05 I.) Thereby, claim 6 is rendered obvious. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo et al. (US 2013/0142943 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0373540 A1 – hereinafter “Lee ‘540” ), Medlege et al. (US 2010/0092871 A1), Yamada et al. (US 2015/0171431 A1), and Takahashi et al. (US 2003/0143465 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Velamakann i et al. ( US 2010 / 0285951 A1 ). Regarding claim 7, modified Kubo teaches the limitations of claim 1 above but fails to explicitly teach that wherein in a case where a viscosity at a shear rate of 10 s -1 and a viscosity at a shear rate of 20 s -1 are measured for the electrode composition, and a power approximation expression is created in terms of orthogonal coordinates where a lateral axis indicates the shear rate and a vertical axis indicates the viscosity, an approximate value of a viscosity at a shear rate of 1 s -1 is 5,000 cP or more, and an absolute value of an exponent part of the power approximation expression is 0.6 or less. Examiner notes that “ in a case where a viscosity at a shear rate of 10 s -1 and a viscosity at a shear rate of 20 s -1 are measured for the electrode composition, and a power approximation expression is created in terms of orthogonal coordinates where a lateral axis indicates the shear rate and a vertical axis indicates the viscosity ” is a product-by-process limitation regarding a test or measurement conducted on the claimed product, but that patentable weight is given to the positively-claimed product features of “ an approximate value of a viscosity at a shear rate of 1 s -1 is 5,000 cP or more, and an absolute value of an exponent part of the power approximation expression is 0.6 or less ”. Velamakann i is pertinent to the problem of dispersion, coating, and formation of electrode layers ([0013, 0021, 0026]) from mixtures including solid, polymer electrolyte , and solvent components ([0013 , 0023-0024 ]). Velamakanni teaches that Shear rate (S) and shear viscosity (V) are related by the following equation, known as the "Power Law Fluid" equation: V= kS (n-1) where "k" is a constant that indicates viscosity at 1 sec -1 and "n" is the Power Law Index (PLI), which indicates of the effect of shear on viscosity ([0037]). Velamakanni teaches in Table I (under [0038]) an inventive example (Ex. 5) in which an anode in ink in an aprotic-organic solvent exhibited viscosity of 5.79 Pa*s ( = 5,790 cP ; i.e., more than 5,000 cP ) at the shear rate of 1 sec -1 and a Power Law Index of 0.5016 (i.e., absolute value of the exponent part is |(n-1)| = |0.5016-1| = |-0.4984| = 0.4984, which is less than 0.6). Velamakanni Ex. 5 has a good result of completely drying but not incinerating in a 140°C oven (Table I : “No” to “Incineration” for Ex. 5 ; see also [ 0034, 0038] ), and does not strongly flocculate (Table I: “weak” to “Flocculation” for Ex. 5). Velamakanni teaches that an ink that will not self-ignite during drying will be safer to manufacture, handle and use , which is an inventive goal ([0020, 0027]) and that high, uniform dispersion (i.e., weak flocculation) is also an inventive goal ([0013-0015, 0032]). Kubo also teaches toward the goal of uniform dispersion (Kubo [0027]) and teaches a drying step of the electrode composition to remove solvent (Kubo [0027, 0030]). Since Kubo is silent toward properties of viscosity and power estimation exponent, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to turn toward the teachings of Velamakanni Example 5 for exemplary ink slurry properties for use in electrode manufacturing , in which the ink did not dangerously self-ignite (for safer processing) and which only weakly flocculated (for better dispersion); as cited above, the 5,790 cP viscosity at 1 sec -1 and Power Law exponent part having an absolute value of 0.4984 (for Ex. 5 per Velamakanni Table I) fall within and satisfy the claimed ranges. Further modifying the electrode composition of Kubo to exhibit similar viscosity at 1 sec -1 shear rate and Power Law exponent to those of Velamakanni , with motivation of avoiding self-ignition and high flocculation, would have been obvious. Thereby, claim 7 is rendered obvious. Relevant Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mochizuki et al. (US 2018 / 0277901 A1) teaches : a material for an electrode including an active material, a sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte having conductivity for ions of metal elements belonging to Group I or II of the periodic table, and an auxiliary conductive agent having at least one metal atom belonging to Group XII, XIII, or XIV of the periodic table ; an electrode sheet for an all-solid state secondary battery and an all-solid state secondary battery in which the material for an electrode is used, and methods for manufacturing an electrode sheet for an all-solid state secondary battery and an all-solid state secondary battery (Abstract). the binder is an organic polymer, used in the present invention is as binding agents for positive electrodes or negative electrodes of battery materials ([0133-0134]), These binders may be used singly or two or more binders may be used in combination ([0139]), and that The mass average molecular weight of the polymer constituting the binder upper limit is preferably 1,000,000 or less, more preferably 200,000 or less, and still more preferably 100,000 or less ([0142]). the material for an electrode of the present invention may contain a dispersant which contains at least one functional group selected from the following group of functional groups (I) and an alkyl group having 8 or more carbon atoms or an aryl group having 10 or more carbon atoms in the same molecule ([0106, 0108]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Jessie Walls-Murray whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1664 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F, typically 10-4 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Matthew Martin can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-7871 . 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. /JESSIE WALLS-MURRAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728