Line 12:
Replace "The decay width Gamma, AFB and FH all depend on 
the squared dimuon mass, q2" by
"The decay width AFB and FH depend on the dimuon mass squared, q2".
Gamma is the total decay width and does not depend on q2.

Line 18-19:
Replace "However, the differential decay rate can be folded about zero
yielding ... where any residual asymmetry will cancel" by
"The parameter FH can be determined by adding the negative and positive
cos theta_l contributions in ... where the asymmetry contributions of AFB 
cancel".
1. No need for "however".
2. Difficult to imagine folding of a decay rate.
3. It is not clear what variable is zero. 
4. It is not clear what "any" asymmetry is and why it is called "residual".

Line 24:
Replace "For Eq. 1 and 2 to remain positive in all regions of phase-space,
AFB and FH have to satisfy the constraints FH >= 0 and ..." by
"AFB and FH are constrained to 0 =< FH =< 3 and ... to guarantee a positive or zero 
differential decay rate in Eq. 1 and 2 at all lepton angles theta_l".
"all lepton angles theta_l" is more precise than "all regions of phase-space".
The upper limit on FH is missing.

Figure 1:
Add "dimuon mass squared" before "ranges" in the caption.

Figure 5:
- The caption can be much shorter and to the point.
- Mention that "the data are not presented for the regions 
around the J/Psi and Psi(2S) invariant mass squared".
This is more precise than "for the regions close to the
narrow ccbar resonances".
- Replace "a SM theory prediction" by "the SM theory prediction".

Table 1 and 2:
- Give first table 2 as table 1 on B+ decay and then the table on B0 decay 
as table 2 in the same order of the figures and of their reference in the text.
- Replace "the second uncertainty is systematic in nature" by
"the systematic uncertainties are discussed in the text".
The column with the interval is not a first uncertainty.

Line 252:
- Replace "large values ... bins of q2" by
"larger values than for the B+ decay ... bins of q2 but still consistent with zero".
- Reverse the order of this sentence ("For the ..") and the previous one 
("The measurements ..").

Line 253:
Remove the sentence "However ... the SM predictions".
1. It is already said that the measurements "are consistent with SM predictions".
2. It is not clear how a simple chi2-probability can be done with asymmetric errors.
3. Why five measurements when you give FH for two large bins for both B0 and B+
and AFB in two large bins for B+ (six measurements)?
4. "not any tension" would mean all zero values.
5. This test does not belong to a Summary as it has not been mentioned before in the Results.