-尊龙游戏旗舰厅官网

��ࡱ�>�� jl����i��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������'` �r�v]bjbj{p{p2^::�: �������0000000�����8�d� um�>(ffff����l�l�l�l�l�l�l$gnh�p:�l90&��&&�l00ff4/mrrr&t0f0f�lr&�lrr00rf2 �3пeh��z�r�lem0umr q qrrn/ q0�j��r�r |������l�l6���um&&&&� � � ��� � � �dt�6�000000���� harvard journal of law & public policy volume 33, issue 3, summer 2010 1. title: a retreat from decision by rule in ashcroft v. iqbal, 129 s. ct. 1937 (2009) authors: rajiv mohan abstract: [...] the court must look at the factual allegations, take them as true, and determine whether the complaint states a plausible claim of relief.10 plaintiffs' lawyers, consumer groups, and civil rights advocates have criticized iqbal for unfairly imposing a more burdensome pleading standard on plaintiffs, thereby denying them access to the courts.11 but there are more basic objections to iqbal based on formalist principles not typically associated with parties like the plaintiffs' bar.12 formalism embodies the notion of decision by clear rule and has been touted for promoting uniformity, neutrality, and predictability.13 by moving pleading standards further away from decision by rule, the supreme court in iqbal improperly undermined the virtues of formalism. [...] a reviewing court should identify all the legal conclusions in a pleading, which are not entitled to a presumption of truth.24 next, if the complaint contains "more than [mere] conclusions," the court should examine all factual allegations, taken as true, and "determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." 2. title: can congress overturn kennedy v. louisiana? authors: richard m r� abstract: as recently illustrated in kennedy v. louisiana, the supreme court regularly interprets the eighth amendment based on the perceived existence of "national consensus." although this practice has been the topic of extensive commentary and criticism, the existing debate has overlooked the most natural implication of the court's consensus-based argumentation - namely, the possibility that recent eighth amendment jurisprudence is subject to federal legislative override. this article argues from existing case law that kennedy should be susceptible to democratic correction via countervailing federal legislation. such legislation would demonstrate that no "national consensus" supports the court's holding, thereby suggesting that the punishment in question does not actually violate the eighth amendment. one might respond that kennedy would have found a constitutional violation based on the court's "independent judgment," regardless of whether a supportive national consensus existed. but even assuming that is true, federal legislation could address the concerns that underlie the court's independent judgment analysis. either way, kennedy's contingent reasoning would permit at least some correction by the democratic branches. exploring these possibilities allows us to better understand and justify recent eighth amendment jurisprudence, as well as recent substantive due process cases like lawrence v. texas that also look to state and federal practice as sources of constitutional law. ultimately, though, the most important consequence of appreciating kennedy's democratic reversibility has more to do with the president than with the professoriate. as a candidate for president, barack obama pointedly criticized kennedy's holding. if this article is correct, then the president and congress now have an opportunity to engage the court in a dialogue regarding the eighth amendment's contemporary practical meaning. 3. title:  hyperlink "javascript:void(0);" chevron's sliding scale in wyeth v. levine, 129 s. ct. 1187 (2009) authors: gregory m dickinson abstract: [...] wyeth argued that recognition of the plaintiffs state tort action would create an unacceptable obstacle to the accomplishment of the purposes and objectives of congress by substituting a lay jury's decision about drug labeling for the expert judgment of the fda.10 after a vermont state trial court rejected wyeth's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the preemption issue, a jury found wyeth liable for negligence.11 although the drug's label warned of the danger of gangrene following inadvertent intraarterial injection, its labeling was nonetheless defective because it failed to instruct clinicians to use the iv-drip method as an alternative to the riskier iv-push method.12 the vermont supreme court affirmed, holding that compliance with both federal and state law would have been possible and that common law liability posed no obstacle to the accomplishment of congressional objectives.13 the supreme court affirmed.14 justice stevens, writing for the majority15 and rejecting both theories of preemption, relied on two guiding principles: first, that the purpose of congress is the ultimate touchstone in every pre-emption case;16 and second, that the historic police powers of the states [are] not to be superseded by [a] federal act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of congress. 4. title: federalism and faith redux authors: ira c lupu abstract: [...] the supreme court could just shrink the ambit of the religion clauses as applied to all levels of government. before we can even start to answer that question, we should note that virtually every state has its own constitutional provision that replicates at least some establishment clause functions.9 some are anti-funding provisions, placed in many state constitutions in the nineteenth century and aimed primarily at state funding of religious schools.10 others, like the virginia constitution, forbid compelling anyone to support or attend any religious ministry.11 those limitations, as construed by state courts and attorneys general, will continue to exist regardless of whether the federal establishment clause applies to the states. [...] the cultural and political clock cannot be turned backwards, even if the legal clock can be. 5. title: judges as honest agents authors: frank h easterbrook abstract: the supreme court made this point in west virginia university hospitals, inc. v. casey.5 plaintiffs won a civil rights suit and asked the court to award them not only attorneys' fees, but also the fees they paid to expert witnesses. section 922(g)(9) of the criminal code makes it unlawful for anyone "who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" to possess a firearm that is connected with interstate commerce.25 this section has a definitional provision corresponding to section 921(a)(20). 6. title: love, truth, and the economy: a reflection on benedict xvi's caritas in veritate authors: john m breen abstract: in the aftermath of the crisis, several household names in the fields of financial services, insurance, securities, banking, and investment banking either ceased to exist, were acquired by other firms, or accepted substantial amounts of government money and partial government ownership in the face of imminent collapse. 6 although the church's teaching with respect to politics, the economy, and culture can be traced back to apostolic times/ the point of departure for the modern tradition of catholic social teaching is pope leo xiii's encyclical rerum novarum.8 published in 1891, leo's encyclical responded to the growing popularity of socialism and its rise as a political force, even as he addressed the new problems that rapid industrialization and urbanization created and the effects these social movements had on the family.9 rerum novarum was of such significance that pope pius xi referred to it as the magna charta on which all christian activities in social matters are ultimately based when commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the document with his own encyclical, quadragesimo anno, in 1931.\n thus, although pope benedict supports the idea of an effective world authority, it is not the vision of such authority now regnant in the minds of many western elites. 7. title: preface authors: leelle b krompass abstract: [...] former attorney general michael mukasey addresses several aspects of the obama administration's homeland security policy. [...] professor gerard bradley provides a thoughtful critique of privilege or punish: 8. title: rational pleading in the modern world of civil litigation: the lessons and public policy benefits of twombl y and iqbal authors: victor e schwartz, christopher e appel abstract: [...] part iii analyzes the public policy implications of these principles and of greater judicial review of pleadings in general, and responds to arguments of proponents of broad notice pleading. [...] courts during this period applied a rigid, highly technical review of pleadings for compliance with common law rules and, where established, civil codes.16 in many instances, these procedural systems were designed not simply to control the level and types of cases heard, but as a mechanism to keep litigants out of the courtroom.17 legal history is stained with examples of such allegiance to formalism effectively providing a trap for the unwary and disenfranchised.18 over time, these legal hurdles stood increasingly at odds with americans' expanding personal liberties and notions of equal justice, thereby fermenting an environment conducive to a fundamental overhaul of the existing pleading system. 1.\n if states adopted the standard, they would add to these benefits greater uniformity in the interpretation of procedural law, preventing disparities among neighboring jurisdictions, confusion, and unfair surprise for litigants. 9. title: religion and its relation to limited government authors: michael w mcconnell abstract: the government controlled the church and used the church for political and governmental purposes.3 the act of supremacy made the king or queen of england the supreme head of the church, responsible for maintaining orthodoxy and naming all of the high prelates.4 the doctrine and liturgy of the church of england were also determined by parliamentary statute, and all ministers in the land were required to conform to them.5 parliament adopted the book of common prayer and the thirtynine articles of faith- one of which held that the monarch was supreme in all matters both religious and civil.6 a highly convenient tenet of faith, if you happen to be the monarch. [...] the state was not at all hesitant to use the church as an instrument of social control: by inculcating the idea that good christian subjects should be obethent to the king and should not engage in rebellion or resistance, but should instead behave themselves as good monarchical subjects. 10. title: the decline of the court of federal claims in  hyperlink "javascript:void(0);" nebraska public power district v. united states, 590 f.3d 1357 (fed. cir. 2010) authors: daniel thies abstract: [...] the court held that the nwpa's jurisdictional grant to the courts of appeals did not extend to disputes about the standard contract,32 particularly those requiring interpretation of contractual provisions- an activity solely within the jurisdiction of the cfc.33 second, even if the d.c. circuit did have jurisdiction, neither the nwpa nor the administrative procedure act (apa) provided a waiver of sovereign immunity allowing a suit against the government to proceed in the courts of appeals.34 the federal circuit accepted an interlocutory appeal,35 decided to hear the case en banc,36 and reversed in an 11-1 decision.37 writing for the majority, judge bryson rejected both grounds for the trial court's decision.38 first, the court rejected the contention that the nwpa's jurisdictional grant did not extend to disputes about the standard contract.\n75 after nppd ii, however, a plaintiff in the same situation could just as easily sue in a district court to challenge the agency's action as an invalid implementation of the statutory requirements for the contract.76 even if such a plaintiff could not obtain complete monetary relief in the district courts,77 it could obtain a declaratory judgment of liability,78 which, under nppd ii, would be binding on the cfc in its later adjudication of the contract. 11. title: the obama administration and the war on terror authors: michael b mukasey abstract: [...] the obama administration has said that it will continue to recognize the state secrets privilege when litigation threatens to disclose national security information, and that it will bring such litigation to an end even when the government is not a party to it.7 the administration professes to have a somewhat narrower view of that privilege than we did,8 but nonetheless at least recognizes it. 12. title: the role of the federal judge under the constitution: some perspectives from the ninth circuit authors: diarmuid f o'scannlain abstract: 5 that the judicial power was left largely undefined in the new constitution merely reflected that its meaning was already widely accepted and understood.6 the traditional conception of the judicial power embodied important ideals. because judges were to decide cases according to the law, they were not free to decide cases according to their personal values or individual notions of justice. 13. title: why conservatives, and others, have trouble supporting the meaningful enforcement of free exercise rights authors: alan brownstein abstract: [...] the scope of religious practice and religiously motivated conduct in the united states is both diverse and extensive.6 accordingly, it is inevitable that some religious activities will produce externalities that burden both individuals and the public interest. [...] there are often legitimate state interests that arguably justify restrictions on religious autonomy.7 this means that, when adjudicating free exercise claims, courts will often have to engage in some sort of balancing process to weigh religious liberty against the state's reasons for interfering with it. [...] the state's protection of one aspect of personal autonomy, such as the right to practice one's religion, does not require the state to protect other important autonomy interests, such as the right to pursue one's trade or vocation, to anywhere near the same extent.\n here, any attempt to exempt religious expressive activities from general regulations without providing parallel exemptions for secular speech would raise serious constitutional concerns. �n n/ffnċ� 14. title: the role of the family in criminal law authors: gerard v bradley abstract: [...] how does the criminal justice system in this country approach the issue of family status? [...] how should family status be recognized, if at all, in a criminal justice system situated within a liberal democracy committed to egalitarian principles of nondiscrimination?"1 pop divides the realm of "family status" into the "benefits" and "burdens" of "family ties. the authors expressly decline one pertinent data collection project: measuring the indirect cultural and econom&'.089;adfghijs����ʹʹʹ���}p`p7p1h��h�' 0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��hu<�5�ojqj^jajh��h�ud5�ojqj^jajh�ud5�ojqj^jo(h�"�h�"�o(&h�"�h�"�5�cjojqj^jajo( h 2e5�cjojqj^jajo(h 2e5�cjojqj^jaj h�' 5�cjojqj^jajo(#h�"�h�"�5�cjojqj^jaj h�e�5�cjojqj^jajo(#h�e�h�e�5�cjojqj^jaj'ghi��  k a ��d�����deg�� � ������������������������gd�psgd)w�gd$?�gdto�gd�l$gd%j,gdu<�gd�"�$a$gd�"�h]u]������      j t ` k ��������ϸ���ωp�߉�a�qaqh��h�`�5�ojqj^jajh��hto�5�ojqj^jajh��hu<�ojqj^jaj1h��h�' 0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��h�l$5�ojqj^jajh��h%j,5�ojqj^jajh��h[rojqj^jaj-h��h�' b*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��hu<�5�ojqj^jajh��h�' 5�ojqj^jajh��hicy5�ojqj^jaj�� '(cm������������cdefho��������˴����u�u�u�fvfvfh��h�ps5�ojqj^jajh��h)w�5�ojqj^jajh��h%j,ojqj^jajh��h$?�5�ojqj^jajh��hs/�5�ojqj^jajh��h%j,5�ojqj^jajh��hanojqj^jaj-h��h�' b*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��hto�5�ojqj^jajh��h�' 5�ojqj^jaj(jh��h�' 5�ojqju^jajofp��� � � � � � � !!!!& &!&"&$& &2&<&m&x&-'.'/'0'2'9'��ƶ�������pƶ���`�`�`ƶ���p�ph��h�)g5�ojqj^jajh��h|�5�ojqj^jajh��hvi�5�ojqj^jajh��hr7a5�ojqj^jajh��h)w�ojqj^jaj-h��h�' b*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��h)w�5�ojqj^jajh��h�' 5�ojqj^jajh��h�ps5�ojqj^jaj1h��h�' 0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh � � ! &!&3&n&.'/'�'�'a,b,�,�,�0�011g1y6z6�6�6l8m8�8�������������������������gd�s�gd�_gdlz�gd�)ggd|�gd)w�gdr7a9'�'�'�'�'`,a,b,c,e,l,�,�,�,�,�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�001:1f1��ƶ�����p�pƶ�����`�k�k�k�`�(jh��h�' 5�ojqju^jajh��h�_5�ojqj^jajh��hlz�5�ojqj^jajh��hr5�ojqj^jajh��h)w�ojqj^jaj-h��h�' b*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��h)w�5�ojqj^jajh��h�' 5�ojqj^jajh��h�)g5�ojqj^jaj1h��h�' 0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh f1q1x6y6z6|6~6�6�6�6�6�6�6k8l8m8n8o8q8x8�8�8�89�:�:�:�:�:�:���ɹ﹠�����q�du﹠����q�u�h��5�ojqj^jajo(h��5�ojqj^jajh��h)w�ojqj^jajh��h�' 5�ojqj^jajh��h[5�ojqj^jaj1h��h�' 0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��h�s�5�ojqj^jajh��hv�ojqj^jaj-h��h�' b*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��h)w�5�ojqj^jaj�8�8�:�:;;4?5?@@t@�@g]h]j]k]m]n]p]q]s]t]u]v]�����������������������gd�' gd��gdmw�gd)w�gd�s��:�:; ;;$;3?4?@@@@&@���ƶ���r`m8(h��h��5�b*ojqj^jajph%h��5�b*ojqj^jajo(ph"h��5�b*ojqj^jajphh��5�ojqj^jajo(h)w�5�ojqj^jajo(h��h)w�ojqj^jaj-h��h�' b*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��h)w�5�ojqj^jajh��h�' 5�ojqj^jaj1h��h�' 0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh h��hmw�5�ojqj^jaj &@r@�@?c\f]g]h]i]k]l]n]o]q]r]u]v]�ѻ�������������h��jh��u h��h��5�b*ojqj^jajo(ph%h��h��b*ojqj^jajphu-h��h��b*ojqj^jajmh phsh (h��h��5�b*ojqj^jajph1h��h��0jb*ojqj^jajmh phsh ic effects upon families of criminal justice practices that do not explicitly depend upon family status, such as sentences of extended incarceration.5 they consider instead what they term distinctively purposeful practices,6 explicit legislative or judicial choices, and laws expressly drawn to privilege or disadvantage persons based on family status alone.     01�82p��. ��a!�"�#��$��%��s�� ����0hj@��j ck�e $1$a$ cjkh_hajmh nhsh th$a@���$ ؞���k=�w[sobi@���b nf�h�*ph3��:^����!��"&�!��"&�!��"&�!��"&� ��"&� �b$�0�:� : 'ghi��ka� � d � ����deg���� !3n./��a$b$�$�$�(�(1)g)y.z.�.�.l0m0�0�0�2�2334757<7=7o7�7�:�:�r � �r ��r ��r ��r � �r ��r �l'�r ��r ��r ��r ��e�r ��r ��r ��r b^0�r ��r ��r ��r �:�r ��r ��r ��r k)�r ��r � �r ��r |x-�r ��r ��r ��r � �r ��r � �r ��r �l'�r ��r ��r ��r �f$�r ��r � �r ��r |x-�r ��r ��r ��r �r ��r � �r ��r �r ��r � �r ��r �f$�r ��r ��r ��r ��r ��r �:�r �'ghi��ka� � d � ����deg���� !3n./��a$b$�$�$�(�(1)g)y.z.�.�.l0m0�0�0�2�2334757<7=7o7�7�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�:�0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���0���@0���@0���0����00���00���00���00���00���00���00���00���00� ��o9'f1�:&@v]"%&')*,-� �8v]#( u]$�  ' �(�(�(�:x��x���@�  @��������� ��0�( � ��b �s ���� ?��h��0�( � ����� > ��d�1 ���/1 ��7, ���6, ���6, ��\6,���.4����h ���� ��d24���1��41��tj4���j4���@@��q n!')))s3s3�:     ���ii��w t!')))�3�3�: b*�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�country-region�<*�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�chmetcnv�9 *�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�state�8 *�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�city�9 *�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�place� ���.16�.6�0�1�590�a�f�false�hasspace�in�negative �numbertype �sourcevalue�tcsc�true�unitname                ����fk��^`������/5af`efmzf<bem~����&�&�'(a)f)o)u)y,_,�.�.�0�0�0�0=7?7�8�8�:�:;a��~#�#))a0c011�3�3�4�457;7=7n788r:t:�:�:::::::::::=7n7�:�:=7?7�:�:��q04e��n[g],-�o�����`<|��o";0ri1�%�rrsui��w�i�= {u�,� uz*�m� �r=��-9h�s��eme�.~�� {r�v �4�1l2q �"�i aha��og>�u��`�1_%v��nh{��q��u�3�d]-�z:kkkkn;�q0�<�?*� 7��:a��^b� �l{��2h�(�#!�q��m4-cqrrs�4>�p]�sao-�?��yn�b~i�(��)ib��>!]�.�` rv:g&>!��}n!�l��2�"�0r��\�|�md-%;�blrbr]�a 6ji� ��vj�`�[jo 5j90�ry �:[� k 3q-r�jx 8i� tp� k�|�2~� ��y��k� ?i��� * �? = ��#? ?*� @�4le� dw" �� �z�g�kd �2�^e �-h�x �w��t� bs &�x� -z�y� �w� i�>�:-� �u kkkkdw" q�x�-h� k^r� �^�vxb� �=#�/y�pur ���� ��'ff�x-z�d�y�(��)fk{z��fv��-�p�'�e��4�!~q�2h`�?i��be��@��fk-<"��l�q�u��y/�x{��]^�~76=&����` [� ��rh&<�^��oc!��d{�/�"���[��h�2��d���t��w�8i� (f�tl(����}�t�a9�~�8� �7l��4�";�g)n��p7v}g�xd|��&�h�w�a�g�b�u�d\*�)#jb�l�d� )r�}��w�gl$l��r�qh� v���/xcz.�^m~;�|p%�fzps7l�ps�#���<>)��s��vj��h5h 5� a�l[�x� xcz�be�yfdxl�y��raj>�n�cr%v��h�a9�� !`��}<�q�}q =�7y]��r�-��.��zf�7�� �e �o[kh,~�hmpm~� mg�=�j��>m�?[%��'w�jo8�l�y2\gqwez ��p]74�`a��m�!�|z��z:�*��b!�g;cq�qq�h�nk^r a�x�t an�gap�y8��x� ��s��d���z��j�vzq��t\ ~��av'po�_m4�i�w��tkpb�` rq1��yn�pur �p}��� urep�&>!�z[fxx)!�b!x{�ec!�t�k��oc!�v�>b(p!� ]!�3�l� �!nr�q�m�!�j#�g-�!�f�d�[z"�u&z�6'�"�zy�q �"ji�_��m�"� ]!�&�"�)��/�"|z�s\�"=v�g��~#�)9~��k#� � �i3#�#? �=#�i\;�j#p%�sh�#���2k�#�|�#ry �ps�#pb��9�#�sa�d $��yj!4$�`�%�qg$�ep$�"e<@v�$:*�$�[��p�$�]'��?[>�?z]%�`�%vd�i1�%�lyk-,�%�,�=��l�%�z�@�x�%�!0��e&poq�bs &�b*&t�(6=&�'w�rh&2\�qp&nyvc��t�&��&�]'�ep$�tw�'~d:(�r�'�kl��>�'��5�l�'�taz��w (r�@�~d:(� _(it~tl(�x�,�dm�(�t�(�pi�(��]�a#�(�j�`�<>)^e ��w)!,�f���)�l�%��)mq{�"*�^�i��le*^l�x�ne*n9��^�*�:8t��[? �v ��o�(s� qh� �`� q�f� � {p���c,@�i��#,�dq[mk, @p�qb,�d&d� �,�>m��x�,� {u�,�@�q>,-�m4-rt�h�fk-�r�-�j�n�2@�-�ggc���-x*�y���->o.-dt��t�.��z]�.�x��<}7/d|���y/ds}���/: o=tj�/0�u0{z�o�!0�ran 0gy|�5j90�$�}�;1�0��efw2 �z��>2"o�m�29!"e�w�2�f\�h�2n�~�w�3ui�� �3dj�u�3��x@�4�;�4�d5��p�4@l�5h 5�^b^� -a5�pv5�d5tw�'��5��5md-�b�5i�d��v�5 -a5�a 6�`d�#6ghch�81�6�&7��6�a�r!�6q1���@�6xx�6)1:t�&7�x�\�~74\�7bd9t=r�7��gr f8c�]��jo8�~�8�� �8��b�n9?oi�q�9�a:�kx_�s�:kkkk�3�:�!�q�o";�4mjj o;�i\;�%�|c;�q��viu;�ru�;�~7�[u�u�`fr>�>�'i�>r]��v�>lrb�mt?<#iq!{�?p[5=�tf�?�t�&�?�*��o-�?�mt?�s�? u|3e�?�-x{�8�?�@}��*.}@��)��-�@�t�`�r�@g��z�@z]%hag;��:a�s6ay8���doahu�(�a�le*�&e�ana��.�an���a�$,&d]�l�d|1�q�i�dbl#g�>e�\���ez�v�n�e�v ��'�e�#�c�hfs�]�=bdf�^^n��z[f�y� ��f�"�o w~g� l`�#�g�{9=��g=v�g�o�t�{s h�-h�pv5p@h�og�ghch'\l��&�h�t�e�hoaq�!~q��y#%�q@gku�nr�q �q� �qqg$�r)b;r�,�q��0hr�l��zwr� {r;1�0��y{r�i�r�� �(u�r�$atxcsfzps8ts)b;r��ts�#�g3%�s�{�s�;�4��g/t�4>�:8t�gn�bd9t]z[t� �m��td $�`�t�s��,!u�rdi�@gku�u0 g�u���uxcs>�uc;�rxyyv�d�^�v4�o�v�j$w�w�w�6�x�m�2:3�x�q�y���x�3�:�^l�x\<�jg�xq>,- q�x�}<��x_/,j�zy��t��`-y<myv ��q�yv^mc���y< z�&xfk{z�kd  �zhp�� [�enx�:[�=�^�` [�0�[(>y��f\�?\i�(��\�m��x�\~�f<1/�\�s���7y]�>aqs�]���c�]hv�i���]viu;�]^ph$^�^b^�`.�^�=�^�1_�kx_�a9�ji�_l{�� !`�qb,�� l`�y`� ��t�`�=�}�j�`�qq��u�`�>�`_m�t a��&na[mk,�9a��q���a��5��>�asq�y�3j�a�zwr�a�t� 3b@�z��)ib�u~b1�h��u�b�~#�%;�b@v�$03cd.�b�ggcg-�!�va�c�^����c(�a�u�c�0hr��#�c�j$wvd0q|�`d�d&d�@�m�f�d,-�zn�d�|�#�9!"e2k�#�g e�/e� * ^ee����l\e�>e��eme�hgqwe�u �t�edu�efd��&fji�,\f<}7/��zfs{tq�f3%�s!,�fqx{~�fxx�6�a�f6�f< z�bl#g�^blkqg�j9r��g8|k=�z�g�-9h�k?oi�u�<mebi�rdi�b*&��b~i�y{r4�i�`-y�^�ix�u�nf�i�~7djtj�/v,�j�8�?w�j�`�t�=�j�4�q\<�j�dk�g�tkz l!{�?�klv:g��3�l<|�<ie�lj l�^(m��k�z*�ma�� �m�hn�y`�gn� �!�g)nfr>��^^nv��, mn�kj>�nh#�n�gv'po� ���"�o�"�o6gp�e �oh��.�o�r��v�o mg���o]z[thptf�?(ap(s� @p�[? bep=r�7�c�p�qp&��dq�vzq� �<#iq�!�q� ���qq =��,�q�w�#!�q{s h�4�q�a�f�l�q|1�q6s�~r�q3q-rie�l��j9r �3�c;�rn[g� �r�-�@�y0�sb(p!��s{fm-dt�y�)1:to �v�$at�6�x� 0w?0w?0w?0w?�.�t�/e��t(ap�}�t�o�t�u2�&xph$^�enx[�x, mnf�x&xn �x�0�<�=.y6�f�� oyrgox*�y�x�u��yd]-sq�y7���yxl�y�t�.��y];yw��y�w��u&z�*n{��tazr=��whkzjx �.tzji��z@�z�.�o���z�`�o��%�z�q�wv{�nh{$,&d�*n{�s�?mq{ hr{��6�jbs{�-x{qx{�@�6m�{�d��0q|�~�vgy|��s� u|�[|�w)�\�| w~g;�|�g ek�|�.�t�y>�|b�5�ds}xyyv�p}�r>�$�}dm�(�m�}j<�v��=�}jbs{�q�}\ ~ �=�h,~03c��)9~whkzit~�;�~j{�~0�n�n�~l�s{t�<(>y\*�4e�z �j�{p�4\�7��(k�i����x ��m�j����[w2 r� �p j^ �n�_at�wb��.h j<sh�to>s�' �r#�l$�}&�m'�m(%j,�p.�i/�z2'4�6cj8�9�e=jj@r7a�nd�udvf0 i%mangy�py�^5a�7ahc 2e�qf�)gjmi�ckalthl[r�psi1vywicy�x}�/�wt�mw��=��`�nj�l�.~�v��~�du�to�4��m��2�)w�lz��c�7�u<�[��r��������^�v��\�a�vi�|w�r�����$?�� ��!�s/�� ��8�*��-��_��f��r��c�7"����s����"�gl�h��-��� ��"�w� p����y���� ��e�`-�|�57�:�@�?7?7��7?7?745758t9�:@@@@@�@@�@��unknown������������g��z ��times new roman5��symbol3&� �z ��arial;���[sosimsun q��h;"�fe��fns�2j�2j!-!),.:;?]}����    & 6"0000 0 0 00000��� � �����=�@�\�]�^���([{�  0 0 00000��;�[����������>�:�: 3�q��hx(��?�����������������������"�2��useruser�������oh�� '��0t������� ��   (4<dl�usernormaluser110microsoft office word@��[/@�y��\�@�zeh��2����՜.�� ,��d��՜.�� ,���� x`t|�� ����� microsoftj�:'  8@ _pid_hlinks�a� l`javascript:void(0);l`javascript:void(0);  !"#$%&'()* ,-./����123456789:;<=>?@abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwx����z[\]^_`����bcdefgh��������k������������������������������������������������������������������������������������root entry�������� �f�й�eh�m�1table��������0 qworddocument��������2^summaryinformation(����ydocumentsummaryinformation8������������acompobj������������m������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ ���� �fmicrosoft office word �ĵ� msworddocword.document.8�9�q
网站地图