In here the patent office says i will get provisional patent in around 1 month.
Now suppose i got the provisional patent in my country (a PCT member). Then some how this invention of mine gets publicized around the world (suppose)
Can some other country (another PCT member) apply patent for this same technology locally?
If not pls answer this too-
Suppose this country (PCT member) starts using this technology cause i have not applied a patent there...then i suddenly apply for patent on all the PCT members (after this technology has been patented in my country). Will it now be illegal for this country to use this technology?...and will it stop using this technology?
Over all is it safe to publicize my provisional patent grant (in my country) to the world?
Answers:
Provisional patents are exactly that, provisional, temporary means to provide patent for your ivention for the meantime. You then have a year to apply for a regular patent.
It's only the first step of a long process but a very important one. I wouldn't make your invention public until you have the regular patent. I certainly wouldn't communicate with a stranger online, providing all details, non-disclusure legal agreement or not. Shame on the other poster for even atempting to do so, have some respect for young inventors.
What you want is an IPC, International Patent Classification. This will allow you to both make it public and assure no one else in the world can claim your invention.
Hang in there, you've made the first step, you're on your way.
I have several things to say. First, the advice to build a working model is the most important. Although it is no longer "required" by the US patent office, it certainly resolves conflicts with the examiners. Proving it purely mathematically may be daunting, to say the least. In your case you are not only claiming new technology but unheard-of technology which, I and every examiner are likely going to cite as imposable, unless presented with irrefutable proof or very sophisticated mathematical proof.
If you want to arrange a legal non-disclosure agreement between you and me, then I'll do it and you can present the entire concept to my humble mind. I am quite certain that I could understand your premises and if my personal knowledge was taxed, I work among two of the best known scientific groups in America. We would find an answer. That answer could be crushing to you. But you do have the type of mind that can work well in physics, even Astronomical physics, if you apply yourself and learn what to challenge and what to accept as truth.
Two hours later Wow I'm getting hate mail. Just because I said you need to prove it. And one who implied that I want to steal it. I am removing you from my contacts. Sorry, contact the paranoid ***** for help.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Prove emotional & physical distress in a lawsuit?
I was wrongfully terminated two weeks ago, and I'm filing a law-suit. This termination really racked me emotionally. I had diarrhea for 3 days, and could hardly eat. I wept incessantly, had little patience with my children, and now my mouth is full of canker sores, and my jaw locks up at night (I guess I'm grinding my teeth and clenching uncontrolably).
I want to sue for emotional and physical distress. But how do I prove this? Do you just go see a doctor and say "here are my symptoms, and they were all because of the stress I suffered because I got fired. Can you put it in writing and sign it so I can use it in a lawsuit?"
Any help on this one?
Answers:
The type of suit that you are talking about is very complex and will depend on state/federal laws. You will need an attorney to help you through this one, if you want to win.
What probably will happen is that you/your attorney will file a sexual harassment/discrimination COMPLAINT with the EEOC. Go to www.eeoc.gov to learn about this phase. Yes, you most first go through the EEOC. Do not file your own complaint or let the clerks at EEOC do the wording for you. Any facts/items/charges that are left out of the complaint CANNOT be brought up in the lawsuit. Get an attorney.
Once the Complaint has been accepted by the the EEOC, your attorney will then contact the EEOC and ask for a 'Letter For Right To Sue". The attorney will then create the documents to file a Federal lawsuit in the closest Federal District court. Word of caution here --- this is NOT a do it yourself project. You must have an attorney and yes most will ask for money upfront (a retainer). It is rare to find an attorney who takes employment cases on contingency (lawyer does not get paid if no win). These cases are expensive just to file the documents.
As for the TORT of intentional infliction of emotional and physical distress. You may or MAY NOT be able to include this in the Federal lawsuit. You will need to go under a doctor's care for this, the doctor will be expected to testify that your condition is a direct result of an intentional action on the part of your former employer. This is Extremely tough to prove.
You need to find an employment law attorney now, before you make any mistakes on this case. Good luck.
Get over it and get another job!!
Oh My God you can't even prove it was your employers fault. America is full of sue happy idiots that don't want to work. Get a life.
Most companies have fired US citizens using At-Will Employment. Part of your attempt requires seeing a psychologist but some feel that this is fraudulent.
http://jobsearchtech.about.com/od/laborl...
If you have documentation it may help.
The best bet is to see a mental health professional
If have have witnesses it help otherwise it is hard.
You would have to convince a doctor that this was the circumstance and he would have to prescribe medication based on this and also be willing to testify to the fact. then you have a suit.
You can claim emotional %26 physical distress, but in order to recover from these alleged injuries you are best off providing objective evidence in the form of testimony or a written declaration from a physician and/or therapist. There needs to be confirmation of the injury. The same thing goes for your lawsuit in general. Right now, based on what you've stated, this is nothing more than he said, she said. It is a weak case. Is there testimony from others? did anyone see/hear your boss make coments or act inappropriately? How long has it happened?
Is at-will employment, the law of your State?
A lawsuit like this becomes a war of experts, the plaintiff brings experts and the defendant brings experts, their testimony competes. All cost money, medical doctors and psychiatrists cost a lot of money. Do you have a lot of money to spend pursueing a very long drawn out lawsuit of this type? If so, why care whether you are working or not? If you do care contact a lawyer in your area, I am sure he would appreciate some of your money as well.
Sexual harassment and wronful termination is another matter, but you need witnesses, including others who may have experienced the same. Again this is expensive, you need to do some cost benefit analysis here.
I want to sue for emotional and physical distress. But how do I prove this? Do you just go see a doctor and say "here are my symptoms, and they were all because of the stress I suffered because I got fired. Can you put it in writing and sign it so I can use it in a lawsuit?"
Any help on this one?
Answers:
The type of suit that you are talking about is very complex and will depend on state/federal laws. You will need an attorney to help you through this one, if you want to win.
What probably will happen is that you/your attorney will file a sexual harassment/discrimination COMPLAINT with the EEOC. Go to www.eeoc.gov to learn about this phase. Yes, you most first go through the EEOC. Do not file your own complaint or let the clerks at EEOC do the wording for you. Any facts/items/charges that are left out of the complaint CANNOT be brought up in the lawsuit. Get an attorney.
Once the Complaint has been accepted by the the EEOC, your attorney will then contact the EEOC and ask for a 'Letter For Right To Sue". The attorney will then create the documents to file a Federal lawsuit in the closest Federal District court. Word of caution here --- this is NOT a do it yourself project. You must have an attorney and yes most will ask for money upfront (a retainer). It is rare to find an attorney who takes employment cases on contingency (lawyer does not get paid if no win). These cases are expensive just to file the documents.
As for the TORT of intentional infliction of emotional and physical distress. You may or MAY NOT be able to include this in the Federal lawsuit. You will need to go under a doctor's care for this, the doctor will be expected to testify that your condition is a direct result of an intentional action on the part of your former employer. This is Extremely tough to prove.
You need to find an employment law attorney now, before you make any mistakes on this case. Good luck.
Get over it and get another job!!
Oh My God you can't even prove it was your employers fault. America is full of sue happy idiots that don't want to work. Get a life.
Most companies have fired US citizens using At-Will Employment. Part of your attempt requires seeing a psychologist but some feel that this is fraudulent.
http://jobsearchtech.about.com/od/laborl...
If you have documentation it may help.
The best bet is to see a mental health professional
If have have witnesses it help otherwise it is hard.
You would have to convince a doctor that this was the circumstance and he would have to prescribe medication based on this and also be willing to testify to the fact. then you have a suit.
You can claim emotional %26 physical distress, but in order to recover from these alleged injuries you are best off providing objective evidence in the form of testimony or a written declaration from a physician and/or therapist. There needs to be confirmation of the injury. The same thing goes for your lawsuit in general. Right now, based on what you've stated, this is nothing more than he said, she said. It is a weak case. Is there testimony from others? did anyone see/hear your boss make coments or act inappropriately? How long has it happened?
Is at-will employment, the law of your State?
A lawsuit like this becomes a war of experts, the plaintiff brings experts and the defendant brings experts, their testimony competes. All cost money, medical doctors and psychiatrists cost a lot of money. Do you have a lot of money to spend pursueing a very long drawn out lawsuit of this type? If so, why care whether you are working or not? If you do care contact a lawyer in your area, I am sure he would appreciate some of your money as well.
Sexual harassment and wronful termination is another matter, but you need witnesses, including others who may have experienced the same. Again this is expensive, you need to do some cost benefit analysis here.
'Protect jailed terrorists, or risk Muslim backlash' warns lawyer?
The London lawyer representing the injured bomber Dhiren Barot today warns that terrorist convicts are being targeted by other inmates in British jails. And she predicts a Muslim 'backlash'.
Barot is a Muslim convert from London who was jailed for life last year for planning mass murder in London and New York with explosive-filled limousines and a radioactive 'dirty' bomb.
Apparently because he has been injured in prison he is expected to make a 'substantial compensation claim'.
His lawyer, Muddassar Arani has complained that Muslim prisoners in Durham's Frankland prison are in particular danger: 'There are not that many Muslim prisoners there, and there is safety in numbers...I don't understand why they can't put them in a separate wing where they can be protected.'
What do you think; are prisons failing in duty to 'protect' jailed terrorists?
Answers:
Aren't Muslim's "backlashing" already? Why cater to their wishes? Will it really do anything but let them know they have more power?
EDIT - Child molesters in prison are in "particular danger" too. Should they be allowed to file "substantial compensation claims" too? How ridiculous. You chose your crime. If you can't play nice with the other inmates, it's your own damn fault.
It makes me wonder why we'd care about the treatment of terrorist prisoners when our prisoners are beheaded on video tape for the world to see. Seriously why should the treatment of their captured comrads matter to us until they start treating those they kidnap properly.
I think that, given the way the British legal and political systems work, the concern of a Muslim backlash is valid.
If a person is being targeted in prison because of the religion -- whether for terrorism or any other crime --- then other members of that religion may take it personally, and may respond.
We've seen the same thing happen in the US based on race in the 1980s and 1990s.
Seperation of religious fundamentalists within the prison system would probably serve to reduce tensions. Providing there was no favouritism towards any prisoner, I really don't see what the problem would be.
SOME day we will have to face it, however hard the world may try, THE radical will not change their way of thinking/preaching and so no rational thought will help.
Coragryph: the way I understand it, these prisoners are NOT being assaulted because of their religion.
They are being assaulted because the other prisoners know they are murdering, cowardly bastards who were attempting to kill innocent people.
Because we live in an 'enlightened' society, we do have a duty of care to prisoners. That said, I definitely am against the jailed terrorists having their own wing or any other measures to enhance their experience in prison.
We may have to keep them alive - we don't have to make them comfortable.
Hello ,is there anyone home??
When a prisoner in custody appears in court all beat up it is a safe bet that PRISONS ARE FAILING TO DO THEIR DUTY TO "PROTECT" JAILED TERRORISTS.
You seem to have a problem with this simple concept or do you believe he beat the crap out of himself alone or perhaps those nasty gremlins did him in.
Your whole post smells of the same bloody dis-regard for prisoners as did the whole Bush administration when it violated the Geneva Convention on prisoners that led to a "blurred line" in the military and the subsequent torturing and killings of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Your very post suggests that it maybe ok to violate their rights by beating them up or even killing them (a beating gone to far) and they should have NO RE-COURSE TO THE LAW.
As YOU should learn and BUSH is now learning from the Supreme Court in 4 rulings to date,PRISONERS MUST HAVE THE LEGAL PROTECTIONS OF THE LAW PERIOD
and have re-course to that law.
This woman specialises in dealing with terrorist suspects. I've read about her.
These scum don't deserve a separate wing and if they don't like getting the crap kicked out of them by their fellow lags they maybe should have thought of that before they committed their offences.
As for "Muslim baclash" yes and there will be more muslim prison inmates as a result. How dare this ***** threaten us?!
There may also be a backlash against the Muslim backlash, so it becomes a vicious circle.
It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy!
Barot is a Muslim convert from London who was jailed for life last year for planning mass murder in London and New York with explosive-filled limousines and a radioactive 'dirty' bomb.
Apparently because he has been injured in prison he is expected to make a 'substantial compensation claim'.
His lawyer, Muddassar Arani has complained that Muslim prisoners in Durham's Frankland prison are in particular danger: 'There are not that many Muslim prisoners there, and there is safety in numbers...I don't understand why they can't put them in a separate wing where they can be protected.'
What do you think; are prisons failing in duty to 'protect' jailed terrorists?
Answers:
Aren't Muslim's "backlashing" already? Why cater to their wishes? Will it really do anything but let them know they have more power?
EDIT - Child molesters in prison are in "particular danger" too. Should they be allowed to file "substantial compensation claims" too? How ridiculous. You chose your crime. If you can't play nice with the other inmates, it's your own damn fault.
It makes me wonder why we'd care about the treatment of terrorist prisoners when our prisoners are beheaded on video tape for the world to see. Seriously why should the treatment of their captured comrads matter to us until they start treating those they kidnap properly.
I think that, given the way the British legal and political systems work, the concern of a Muslim backlash is valid.
If a person is being targeted in prison because of the religion -- whether for terrorism or any other crime --- then other members of that religion may take it personally, and may respond.
We've seen the same thing happen in the US based on race in the 1980s and 1990s.
Seperation of religious fundamentalists within the prison system would probably serve to reduce tensions. Providing there was no favouritism towards any prisoner, I really don't see what the problem would be.
SOME day we will have to face it, however hard the world may try, THE radical will not change their way of thinking/preaching and so no rational thought will help.
Coragryph: the way I understand it, these prisoners are NOT being assaulted because of their religion.
They are being assaulted because the other prisoners know they are murdering, cowardly bastards who were attempting to kill innocent people.
Because we live in an 'enlightened' society, we do have a duty of care to prisoners. That said, I definitely am against the jailed terrorists having their own wing or any other measures to enhance their experience in prison.
We may have to keep them alive - we don't have to make them comfortable.
Hello ,is there anyone home??
When a prisoner in custody appears in court all beat up it is a safe bet that PRISONS ARE FAILING TO DO THEIR DUTY TO "PROTECT" JAILED TERRORISTS.
You seem to have a problem with this simple concept or do you believe he beat the crap out of himself alone or perhaps those nasty gremlins did him in.
Your whole post smells of the same bloody dis-regard for prisoners as did the whole Bush administration when it violated the Geneva Convention on prisoners that led to a "blurred line" in the military and the subsequent torturing and killings of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Your very post suggests that it maybe ok to violate their rights by beating them up or even killing them (a beating gone to far) and they should have NO RE-COURSE TO THE LAW.
As YOU should learn and BUSH is now learning from the Supreme Court in 4 rulings to date,PRISONERS MUST HAVE THE LEGAL PROTECTIONS OF THE LAW PERIOD
and have re-course to that law.
This woman specialises in dealing with terrorist suspects. I've read about her.
These scum don't deserve a separate wing and if they don't like getting the crap kicked out of them by their fellow lags they maybe should have thought of that before they committed their offences.
As for "Muslim baclash" yes and there will be more muslim prison inmates as a result. How dare this ***** threaten us?!
There may also be a backlash against the Muslim backlash, so it becomes a vicious circle.
It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy!
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Prosecution accomplishes what?
my 18 year old brother shoplifted, payed the maximum amount possible back to the retailer.. which by michigan law is 200 dollars because it was under 50 dollars... but now the retailer is taking him to court, and we're trying our hardest to keep this off his record.. i was just wondering what prosecution will accomplish? can they get more money? or is prsecututing strictly for determination of punishment?
Answers:
Under the practice of "civil restitution" now common in many states, the retailer has the shoplifter sign an agreement to pay a penalty fee and promise never to come back to the store in exchange for the retailer not filing any criminal charges against the shoplifter. If this store had your brother sign such an agreement, then they can't press any charges against him unless he also did something else in addition to the shoplifting (such as damaging property, or assaulting somebody on the property). It's also possible that your brother broke the agreement by later coming back into the store, thus allowing the store to press the original shoplifting charges plus trespassing charges against him.
He broke the law -- the prosecution's job is to bring people to trial and seek punishment if they are convicted.
He broke the law -- it's as simple as that.
Your brother would not be having these problems if he wasn't stupid in the first place. I'm so sick of the "poor law breakers" being persecuted. Are you kidding me? Tell you brother to be a man, shut up, and take his punishment. Oh yeah, and you might want to tell him to grow a brain and stop breaking the law. If you don't like my answer you can always dial 1-800- waaaaaaaaaaaa.
Hey BigFill try dialing 1-800-EAT-S#$T! This kid is not asking you to run your mouth about something his brother did! You need to be taken down a notch or 3. There's no need for you to degrade that kid. If you choose to open your mouth make sure your opinion is at least valid and applicable to the situation.
pappy...thank you about bigfill. agree with you.
as for the question, if it is the retailer taking him to court, then it is civil court. since he already repaid the retailer, i don't see what he's trying to accomplish. the scenario will be the retailer telling the judge that your brother took something but then paid it back...end of story.
if the DA takes him to criminal court, that might be more of a problem but since it is under $50 and has been repaid many times over,50 to 200, he has a defense and most likely should be fine unless there's more to the story.
good luck to him..
Answers:
Under the practice of "civil restitution" now common in many states, the retailer has the shoplifter sign an agreement to pay a penalty fee and promise never to come back to the store in exchange for the retailer not filing any criminal charges against the shoplifter. If this store had your brother sign such an agreement, then they can't press any charges against him unless he also did something else in addition to the shoplifting (such as damaging property, or assaulting somebody on the property). It's also possible that your brother broke the agreement by later coming back into the store, thus allowing the store to press the original shoplifting charges plus trespassing charges against him.
He broke the law -- the prosecution's job is to bring people to trial and seek punishment if they are convicted.
He broke the law -- it's as simple as that.
Your brother would not be having these problems if he wasn't stupid in the first place. I'm so sick of the "poor law breakers" being persecuted. Are you kidding me? Tell you brother to be a man, shut up, and take his punishment. Oh yeah, and you might want to tell him to grow a brain and stop breaking the law. If you don't like my answer you can always dial 1-800- waaaaaaaaaaaa.
Hey BigFill try dialing 1-800-EAT-S#$T! This kid is not asking you to run your mouth about something his brother did! You need to be taken down a notch or 3. There's no need for you to degrade that kid. If you choose to open your mouth make sure your opinion is at least valid and applicable to the situation.
pappy...thank you about bigfill. agree with you.
as for the question, if it is the retailer taking him to court, then it is civil court. since he already repaid the retailer, i don't see what he's trying to accomplish. the scenario will be the retailer telling the judge that your brother took something but then paid it back...end of story.
if the DA takes him to criminal court, that might be more of a problem but since it is under $50 and has been repaid many times over,50 to 200, he has a defense and most likely should be fine unless there's more to the story.
good luck to him..
Prosecuting attorney?
In a smaller town does the prosecuting attorney have more power than the attorney general?
Answers:
There is an office at a state level, generally an elected position. The Federal position is appointed and ratified by the congress.
No, but in a small town, you have the "good ole boy" factor to deal with.
If you suspect something, contact the State Attorney's Office. This office is not only supposed to protect the people of a state from criminals but also from state officials at all levels, that have gone wrong.
Attorney General is state (or federal).
Prosecuting attorney is local.
It's like asking whether the local police chief has more power than the Governor. In practice, no, but given the local guy's power is concentrated locally, you see it used more often.
It depends on the case. The Attorney General is a higher level office, but the AG's office and your local prosecutor's office do not generally prosecute the same type of cases. If a murder is committed in your community, the prosecutor has more power. If the crime is one that affects the whole state, the AG prosecutes. It's not subject to an accurate comparison because their jobs are different.
Answers:
There is an office at a state level, generally an elected position. The Federal position is appointed and ratified by the congress.
No, but in a small town, you have the "good ole boy" factor to deal with.
If you suspect something, contact the State Attorney's Office. This office is not only supposed to protect the people of a state from criminals but also from state officials at all levels, that have gone wrong.
Attorney General is state (or federal).
Prosecuting attorney is local.
It's like asking whether the local police chief has more power than the Governor. In practice, no, but given the local guy's power is concentrated locally, you see it used more often.
It depends on the case. The Attorney General is a higher level office, but the AG's office and your local prosecutor's office do not generally prosecute the same type of cases. If a murder is committed in your community, the prosecutor has more power. If the crime is one that affects the whole state, the AG prosecutes. It's not subject to an accurate comparison because their jobs are different.
Proposed NYC Public School Causes Stir, What do you think?
NEW YORK 鈥? This city has dozens of small public schools that focus on themes _ sports careers, the arts and social justice. Few generate controversy.New York already has schools specializing in Asian culture and Chinese language, and is opening one that centers on Latin American culture. the education department revealed plans for the Arabic school earlier this year.
Do you think our tax dollars should be spent on any of these special school for students based on their ethnicity, culture or religion?
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007apr16/0...
Answers:
I think its a great idea. If the school succeeds it can hopefully promote understanding between Arab and American culture as well as break down stereotypes. For at least a few kids anyways...
Besides, why does it matter where the kids are being schooled as long as they are learning to some sort of set standard?
Just a thought.
Hmm..segragation, eh? Well technically I suppose it would since it would be an Arab-centric school. But aren't catholic schools mostly catholic? Does Brown v Education support elective segregation because I dont think it does? If the school was intentionally excluding non-muslims or non-arabs then yes it would be a problem.
NO!
ethnicity, culture, religion? NO. ( prayer is not allowed in school. has N.Y. forgotten? ) sports,careers, arts, social justice? YES . then they should open a school that teaches morality. segregation? we are supposed to be more enlightened than that. have these crazy people forgotten their history?
That was racial! This is cultural! Two different things! And as long as they are schools, educating the young, they qualify for federal dollars, or they should!
Do you think our tax dollars should be spent on any of these special school for students based on their ethnicity, culture or religion?
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007apr16/0...
Answers:
I think its a great idea. If the school succeeds it can hopefully promote understanding between Arab and American culture as well as break down stereotypes. For at least a few kids anyways...
Besides, why does it matter where the kids are being schooled as long as they are learning to some sort of set standard?
Just a thought.
Hmm..segragation, eh? Well technically I suppose it would since it would be an Arab-centric school. But aren't catholic schools mostly catholic? Does Brown v Education support elective segregation because I dont think it does? If the school was intentionally excluding non-muslims or non-arabs then yes it would be a problem.
NO!
ethnicity, culture, religion? NO. ( prayer is not allowed in school. has N.Y. forgotten? ) sports,careers, arts, social justice? YES . then they should open a school that teaches morality. segregation? we are supposed to be more enlightened than that. have these crazy people forgotten their history?
That was racial! This is cultural! Two different things! And as long as they are schools, educating the young, they qualify for federal dollars, or they should!
Proponents of choice theory feel that crime can be eliminated by...?
A. forgiving, no punishing
B. building more prisons
C. administering several years of psychotherapy
D. convincinf the offender that crime is a poor activity because of negative consequences.
Answers:
Who teaches this cr*p? I'm an attorney. This question and the other you posted are nonsense! If you are in law school, please realize your professor is doing you a disservice and you will never use whatever the correct answer is outside of law school.
Most people do not realize they violate a statute whne they do so. That is why most statutes do no carry criminal sanctions. However, there are many "strict liability statutes"
that require a person to be impisoned even if the person does not know he/she broke the law. How does Choice Theory deal with unknown violations of the law?
D. Choice theory shows the offendor that their criminal activity has negative consequences and gives them another choice to help their recidivist activities in the future. It's basically a way for people without that "off" switch to learn how to not be a raging prick.
The answer is fish.
Apparently McMufin never went to school for Criminal Justice. If this is for your class YOU should be doing the reading of your text and answering the questions yourself...that is why we go to college.
B. building more prisons
C. administering several years of psychotherapy
D. convincinf the offender that crime is a poor activity because of negative consequences.
Answers:
Who teaches this cr*p? I'm an attorney. This question and the other you posted are nonsense! If you are in law school, please realize your professor is doing you a disservice and you will never use whatever the correct answer is outside of law school.
Most people do not realize they violate a statute whne they do so. That is why most statutes do no carry criminal sanctions. However, there are many "strict liability statutes"
that require a person to be impisoned even if the person does not know he/she broke the law. How does Choice Theory deal with unknown violations of the law?
D. Choice theory shows the offendor that their criminal activity has negative consequences and gives them another choice to help their recidivist activities in the future. It's basically a way for people without that "off" switch to learn how to not be a raging prick.
The answer is fish.
Apparently McMufin never went to school for Criminal Justice. If this is for your class YOU should be doing the reading of your text and answering the questions yourself...that is why we go to college.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)