... - 1and, definedKC and hCas in the proof of Theorem 3.1, conditions(2.22) and (2.23) hold true . Notice that they are the rewriting of conditions (2.8) and (2.9), respectively, in the case of ... assumed in [11] (see condi-tion (8)). But, on the other hand, taking g > 1 one can lose the summability of the function KCrequired in assumption (7) of [11]. In fact , in the following example ... =+∞, in contradiction with the boundedness of x.Therefore, x’(t) ≡ 0in [˜t,+∞) and by the definition of ˜tthis implies˜t=t∗.So,x’(t) ≡ 0in[ t*, +∞) and by the definition of t* this...