alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6480

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DEMAINE DIWAN BENJAMIN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. ( 4:07

- cr
- 01427

- TLW

- 1 )

Submitted : July 20, 2017 Decided: July 25, 2017

Before DUNCAN and WYNN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Demaine Diwan Benjamin , Appellant Pro Se. Carrie Fisher Sherard, Assistant U nited S tates Attorney , Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
De maine Diwan Benjamin appeals the district court ’ s order s denying relief on his motion for reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and denying
his motion for reconsideration. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error
. See United States v. Muldrow , 844 F.3d 434, 437 (4th Cir. 2016) (providing standard). Accordingly, we affirm

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argumen t would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Although a district court lacks authority to reconsider a ruling on a § 3582(c)(2) motion, “this prohibition [is] non

- jurisdictional, and thus waived when the government fail[s] to assert it below.” United States v. May , 855 F.3d 271, 274 (4th Cir. 2017). Here, “[b]ecause the government failed to raise this non

- jurisdictional limitation below, it is waived on appeal.” Id . at 275. We therefore analyze Benjamin’s § 3582(c)(2) motion and motion for reconsideration together.
#### Mitchell RUTLEDGE v. STATE.

5 Div. 610.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

April 12, 1988.

PATTERSON, Judge.

Pursuant to the decision of the Alabama Supreme Court in *Rutledge v. State,*523 So.2d 1118 (Ala.1988), this case is reversed and remanded.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All Judges concur.
#### STATE ex rel. Charles H. FELTON v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 86-KH-1995.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 30, 1987.

In re Felton, Charles H.; applying for writ of mandamus; Parish of Orleans, Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Div. “C”, No. 291-305; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. K-5980.

Denied.
OR I GINA 

DAVID GLENN BETTENCOURT 

Attorney at Law- Hawai'i Bar No. 970 

Suite 304 Dillingham Transportation Bldg. 

735 Bishop Street, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813 

Telephone: (808) 521-3491 

Facsimile: (808) 521-7749 RECEIVED 

Email: airlaw@pixi.com 

Attorney for OFFSHORE 

FLIGHT SCHOOL, INC. 

OCT 0 6 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARING 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

d-OIY- OGql 

In the Matter of: ) FAA Case No. 2014WP910016 

) 

OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, ) APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL 

INC ) DAVID GLENN BETTENCOURT; 

) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

) 

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL DAVID GLENN BETTENCOURT 

COMES NOW OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, INC, by and through 

its President TOMOYUKI YOSHIZAWA, and hereby designates DAVID 

GLENN BETTENCOURT, pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.16(g), as its legal 

counsel and agent for service of documents in this civil penalty proceeding. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, 29 September 2014 

OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, INC. 

T~i::w-~~resident 

1~1 ~.&r&f DAVID GLENN BETTENCOURT 

Attorney appearing as counsel for 

OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, INC. 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARING 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: ) FAA Case No. 2014WP910016 

) 

OFFSHORE FLIGHT SCHOOL, ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

we ) 

) 

) 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on the date set forth below, 

copies of the foregoing were duly served as set forth below: 

Certified 

Mail 

TO: Federal Aviation Administration ( ) 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence A venue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

(Original+ 3 copies) 

Federal Aviation Administration ( ) 

Office of Regional Counsel- ANM-7 

Northwest Mountain Region 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW 

Renton, Washington 

First Class 

Mail 

(XX) 

(XX) 

DA'l'hU' Honolulu. Hawaii, ~emu:~ 

AVID GLENN BET EN COURT 

Attorney for OFFSHORE FLIGHT 

SCHOOL, INC. 

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF JPS TEXTILE GROUP, INC. CONTAINED IN THE BODY OF THE
ACCOMPANYING FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-28-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-28-1995
<CASH>                                           1,352
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   90,317
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,131
<INVENTORY>                                     48,729
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               168,223
<PP&E>                                         281,823
<DEPRECIATION>                                 118,866
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 412,822
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           66,621
<BONDS>                                        327,668
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           28,171
<PREFERRED>                                        250
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                     (37,305)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   412,822
<SALES>                                        472,565
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               472,565
<CGS>                                          406,070
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  406,070
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,946
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (16,464)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (17,664)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (33,320)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 20,120
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (30,864)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (34.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (34.70)
        

</TABLE>
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 44033

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

JAMES JOSEPH O’BRIEN ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 779

Filed: November 16, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, State of Idaho, Latah County. Hon. John R. Stegner , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of four years, with a minimum period of confinement of one year, for possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, affirmed

. Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

James J. O’Brien was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance

, methamphetamine, Idaho Code § 37

- 2732(c)(1) . The district court imposed a unified four

- year sentence, with one year determinate, suspended the sentence, and placed O’Brien on probation

. O’Brien ap peals, contending that his sentence is excessive. Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the
factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.2 1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). W hen reviewing the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho
722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say that the district cou rt abused its discretion.
Therefore, O’Brien ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         278,297
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,629,092
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (43,619)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,924,748
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,933,832
<PP&E>                                       3,541,910
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,431,372)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,324,977
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,202,225
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,885
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,289,737
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,324,977
<SALES>                                     16,807,349
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,807,349
<CGS>                                       12,545,291
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,779,101
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                59,278
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (316,443)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                225,492
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            225,492
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   225,492
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        

</TABLE>
No. 12975 INTHE SUPREME COURT OF 

### THE STATE OF MONTANA 1975

INA C. PERKINS,

, 1 #. plaintiff and%~~~3ilane,

THOMAS 

### N. PERKINS,

/ / '.' Defendant and ~es~kndent.
Appeal from: District Court of theThird Judicial District, Honorable Robert 3.Boyd, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: ForAppellant: Knight, Dahood, Mackay and McLean, Anaconda, Montana Edward D. Yelsa argued, Anaconda, Montana ForRespondent

### : Daniels and Mizner, ~eer Lodge, Montana M.K. Daniels argued, Deer Lodge, Montana

k'g: ry 6 .

### ."-- Filed: 

## .)-.. i 

## . , , Submitted: September 

### 12, 1975 Decided: 

## SEP24j,O&Mr. Justice Frank I. Haswell delivered the Opinion of the Court.
In a divorce action in the district court, Deer Lodge County, Hon. Robert J. Boyd sittingwithout a jury, judgment
was entered awarding the wife a divorce, custody of twominor children,and providing for a division of themarital property. The husband appeals from the property division. The district court adopted thewife's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Judgment was entered in conformity therewith as follows: (1) The sellers' interest of the parties in a contract for deed on some property in Opportunity, Montana, was set aside in trust for the twominor children of the marriage, (2) a Great LakesMobile Home in the name of the wife was set aside for her use, (3)a ParamountMobile Home in the name of both parties was ordered sold and the proceeds equally divided between husband and wife, (4)a 1965 Buick and a 1950 Internationalpickup in the names of both parties was set aside for the use of the wife and the twominor children, (5)the farm equipment owned by both parties was set aside for the use of the husband, (6) two parcels of land in the Opportunity subdivision in the wife's name was set aside for her use and disposition. The husband requestsus to review on appeal the disposition of the two trailer houses and the two parcels of land in the Opportunity subdivision. The district court's adjustment of the property rights of the parties under its equitable powers will notbe disturbed on appeal except for an abuse of discretion. Aksamit v. Aksamit, 162Mont. 266, 511 P.2d 10; Cook v. Cook, 159 Mont. 98, 495 P.2d 591. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion. Each casemust be considered by the district court individually with an eye to its unique circumstances. Cook v. Cook, supra. Here the husband was financially unable to contribute tothe support of theminor children, so the wife was granted a proportionately larger share of themarital property to offset her increased obligation. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Justice We concur:



### ................................. Chief Justice
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 22593]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08902]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8275]

The United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy Notice 
of Charter Renewal

    The Department of State has renewed the charter of the United 
States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. The Commission was 
reauthorized by the Congress and the President under Section 1280 
Public Law 112-239, signed into law on January 3, 2013. The Commission 
authorization is retroactive to October 1, 2010, and continues until 
October 1, 2015.
    Since 1948, the Commission has been charged with appraising U.S. 
Government public diplomacy activities (activities intended to 
understand, inform, and influence foreign publics) and increasing the 
understanding of and support for these same activities. The Commission 
submits reports to the Congress, the President, and the Secretary of 
State on public diplomacy programs and activities; submits other 
reports as it deems appropriate to the Secretary of State, the 
President, and the Congress; and makes reports and other information 
available to the public in the United States and abroad, on the 
Commission's Web site or through other means.
    The Commission consists of seven members appointed by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The 
members of the Commission represent the public interest and are be 
selected from a cross section of educational, communications, cultural, 
scientific, technical, public service, labor, business, and 
professional backgrounds. Not more than four members can be from any 
one political party. The current members of the Commission are: William 
J. Hybl (Chairman), Sim Farar (Vice Chairman), Lyndon L. Olson, Penne 
Korth Peacock, Lezlee Westine, and Anne Terman Wedner. One position is 
vacant.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Armstrong, tel. 202-632-9930; 
armstrongbw@state.gov.

    Dated: April 10, 2013.
Bruce Armstrong,
Staff Director for Resources, Office of the Under Secretary for Public 
Diplomacy and Public Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-08902 Filed 4-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-44-P
```
## U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, D.C. --.< i .,-.

IN THE MATTER OF ,,-,,-M ,;l l ---') 

# MACH ONE AIR CHARTERS, INC.
FDMS NO.: FAA-2015-0643


### ASSIGNED TO THE HONORABLE RICHARD C. GOODWIN, ALJ.

RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL TIME FOR DISCOVERY.
Respondent has no objection to Complainant's motion for additiontime to conduct discovery provided the Order is mutual. DATED: January 11,2016 STEVEN 

### L. GRAFF, INC. A Professional Law Cor oration

### by·A;~~~~~~~~~ STEV RAFF E Attorney at !aw 43399 Calle De Velardo Temecula, CA 92592 (951) 303-6400 tel (800) 839-7777 toll free 

### aviationcounse/@aol.com Attorney for Respondent

Pa e 1 RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S REQUEST FORADDITIONAL TIME FOR DISCOVERY '-1. i'JCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certifythat I have this day, placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid, a copy ofthe RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S REQUEST FORADDITIONAL TIME FOR DISCOVERYaddressed to: GLENN H. BROWN, ESQ. Office ofthe Regional Counsel FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 222 W. 7TH Avenue #14 Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7586 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, ALJ Office of Hearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAvenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, D.C. 20590 I herebyfurther certify that I have this day, placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid, the original and copy ofthe RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S REQUEST FORADDITIONAL TIME FOR DISCOVERY addressed to: FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION The Hearing Docket, AGC-430 WilberWright Building- Room 2W1000 800 IndependenceAvenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 I declare under penalty of perjury underthe laws ofthe state ofCalifornia that the foregoing is true and correct and thatthis document is executed on January 11 2016 atieme**a,G~fornia.** 

# 2 \.

--.,,,



### Pa e 2 RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S REQUEST FORADDITIONAL TIME FOR DISCOVERY
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JIHAD MUTLAG SAMMARCO, )

DOC #R29143, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D15-5623

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

________________________________ )

Opinion filed November 2, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Pinellas County; Philip J. Federico, 

Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and Simone A. Lennon, Special 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, 

for Appellant. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

SILBERMAN, VILLANTI, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Fund.com Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Gregory Webster, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Fund.com Inc. and will be retained by Fund.com Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





/s/  Gregory
      WebsterGregory
      WebsterChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)





November
30, 2009
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 197

Referring S. 1698 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of D.W. Jacobson, Ronald

Karkala, and Paul Bjorgen of Grand Rapids, Minnesota’’ to the chief

judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims for a report thereon.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 6, 1999

Mr. GRAMS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Referring S. 1698 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of D.W.

Jacobson, Ronald Karkala, and Paul Bjorgen of Grand

Rapids, Minnesota’’ to the chief judge of the United

States Court of Federal Claims for a report thereon.

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. REFERRAL.

3 S. 1698 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of D.W.

4 Jacobson, Ronald Karkala, and Paul Bjorgen of Grand

5 Rapids, Minnesota’’ now pending in the Senate, together

6 with all the accompanying papers, is referred to the chief

7 judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims.
2

•SRES 197 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROCEEDING AND REPORT.

2 The chief judge shall—

3 (1) proceed according to the provisions of sec4 tions 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code;

5 and

6 (2) report back to the Senate, at the earliest

7 practicable date, providing—

8 (A) such findings of fact and conclusions

9 that are sufficient to inform the Congress of the

10 nature, extent, and character of the claim for

11 compensation referred to in such bill as a legal

12 or equitable claim against the United States or

13 a gratuity; and

14 (B) the amount, if any, legally or equitably

15 due from the United States to D.W. Jacobson,

16 Ronald Karkala, and Paul Bjorgen of Grand

17 Rapids, Minnesota.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           4,226
<SECURITIES>                                    44,474
<RECEIVABLES>                                   26,575
<ALLOWANCES>                                        41
<INVENTORY>                                      2,556
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                79,046
<PP&E>                                          22,507
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,379
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  93,281
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,269
<BONDS>                                          2,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           663
<OTHER-SE>                                      77,913
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    93,281
<SALES>                                        102,472
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               102,472
<CGS>                                           80,009
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   80,009
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,612
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 205
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,963
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,844
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,119
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,119
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.60
        

</TABLE>