ࡱ> `!Eor،@V9& ) @4xeQAN0{QP/UAH*xB'< 8!08QRVr6 'p!1U:Pf NkСeXfPaͦoeiQ2B,\Yŷ5iDJe9xp ]!C[d ޞ cїܰek59+}߅Ǟ ?wϽ\8vUN^I~;%UZJc닢sgkv2T jcuQ%U/Sa_!ܗ(WFnc@\ ֞O- Q7Ӫ:u]]ΙsCSsnf_Gp>q OBnu{ @=₣CDȺ"@Sk(Lh-wGZ>;RBg"2~G7S`qS+!UH#T!˸DDF,eZ ?i!"gAEQpZ8". \i!1.6!.f GUa_ApC!g,n/*ND Ӏ^eI"w"8Rmc*;ToϏD*Enz1Nē_@Y")CrQ_ `QFpX= ^@dn""k# Ũպqʖ`?{m~̖|n$LvV䦂Հir?j&݅@vrѕf̬DQ|jFŸ؉9WՖqޮu"42 Zf-ڈT_pȕU".E@xƂN䚍D.KF;5)lok ݘF ^0ةUFZ*_28;*WD2vy61j8ػ ['smp-tSK|i۰^':voY|qqDL,fԗ9Ih#u䒔8FnRtJ `%Fq<ė6&m!H =zf52ׄ.d neDx@[hZ|ÅtNΡ@[S!\ڈ wNq/Cg K(~s@\ ix/h ×`2C03xGq2ŷBo_C1ffHwhme)(-7=uʠXj!+h x73߂8=?R Nbv,9!3d^BBCY"`x/њ(L@gͩFD y o=[fM 㷬HFT'Hr^LF.Wx۠H+ƵR(9⦼!`6:%y":! M)l'Anz3u WkrYg8ޅTGeD]^ o7\uddn@\]Dy3 fJZ61^ՉɘRF'iWA;JH"qD~[ 2/ZK!ɂ_'D!E`Z{ Wɣ_!ȩXRZJgX >+; BPpF_ﳓ-2KYa*EтHDhPF( 'ȆsQ#4mkR!aV0 ~Ɉ 7e`2ﱊL>{Lt͒B EV,= }DnNǩ" (|:E P9a<*6Yx֔ ^shcWLL"ltDޒͥ0\Z{`IF -Z9M@ &f!Y*79µ޲mJM``ۑo$03Ѭ<6r-AHlȴ2 \R!)^8zXRBP08}F7-amcF6qK"H:L#?M5#Oj:ܫP 8=Xy/gl(p$Cj`qKwe n8"a_ƓO| D"öD^H yULu6lX]q"EVMy~n_"s!,Q29t8Җ@3QƉiILf 8Y`̒^K!G,1:__">C2ESU$wS"'»ռfqBwlUD^ei{%i*5AzgRBϻiA Yg`asqRDF}=ctlDxdB5k-d~}> FjfOiWZkdȺBF<ї: samkxU"BWgڅ#]'@5,2 ==ͰQ[/ma=o[P#+|QZsj% ajxKNB Zb0!ѓDjE6)=Duhx~@N|[GϷCdF69 !'o[S@ ZZ A+vG_Є&8j.ʰ=R$OG 1D$DD^{/`SI~E:\OY^k{hC!&T/u _i7iHH 8x-cή<?h;kwZUɩRju<%sAFϵ0kK5MHڦ>pK7SM引T-n!Z14~db Jd(EpZqxI)ؓ_D kuK_XtdMs>QaR^!.o)G#AdאO_䰞Lt!|T~KqDdhd0-KrxHMzAJWJTKcf ]R}dgИ%[)"%NBmVlP20"br_x`gBi 2|Y"I_ E߆.4g%lL`e٫Dm25UUcГ4鏾"o|&Qp6gnCTԂHN.c8 &jbFH{"cF nY-DkX xGBY~;9}0 "OasnY-`9 }.6}JLុk47LjGC|}hJ֤CsάNh5jtU 8x0]"硻&ƈ;<D YKRR]=4OCu9Y:u,^_KuP=nd 9kY{ ]XDS^U rK3[Wo(>kG^7"7`&fd:fNl&+Ƿ֊,%(eebcLE-(w*\t_,c;>.)R <S7 E\xP1w"8\ ZC*E)gM$*B c۵1[bu+P|9Ki-ԣ|^kǑr,Y/"/wAĨ+a!/"XC4mT#q(#+ ]l.î0Tn0jr~uDv󋗭yġ3YF88'VY3v ;O@8ZND]a_ _ @6tjhIENDB`n MoN\ ر=PNG  IHDR#bsRGB pHYs.> KIDATx^Y_R W5Qʒ(,)!{DY.ȾE"VJ"ri\O4g{LdtR߿wp9t.]ڴiRݻw&UjpS^9b6mco۶[}Çg]yرc/_GӺukrݺuK7O@BVSNU|>|@'sӦM,Y2iҤtVB+N ՒD._Y^˙{.dIڽ{7*;oB#ɓt]W[& Tׯ^p]v>^t5#oܸN͛7{qt̫j*)u&oƨu )6ϑ ٿ={ưs΍7zGx)yqdd֭[e@ w iIJ(Pir'"޴ޛIZj6@N%h q.taY6ْ*dn,R?Di0هC";B74_J\y;ۊ,bqhٰpC ā6xL ))ec_Gnذc$lIgjyPs9l2')Q7N\|t'ech!Ez I%eϠA⢔ 8h֭)80RTC;f͚1Orٵ{1?>gT7$>bVlrfY'38 YWXeV ϟ;.sccW^u10t*swݟ}┴]ӾȯJN?~;}#*>e$^ΧB/#{B$@="?U(|4H$u|5lB x[[oEgm!@ T.[J8(/HQD[^(8P!bױSm Tb#xॊ+EB $G8FJ  xC*LǓٸU/V'~s;gncBDjĄXaLJyBw}BęWE:O }dH 9Ane*{~Ӭ}π Mbj;@mwn')KB@m|?'5yD+FiPNȰqa;ކcNk\HC<О@i<>LsfͣL|[+6GŴ(}ZW (--6q|sTRGA,jnH$(b=g4zl.m\•)QleQ%ɰ$ٯ—$V>L~1>aܨ7FϷ'5}*|)M Vq?|}MA"A>j6WA-|d߅yʒYMH桤(NAC$\}% >fgp4.~oBom\G)Jw)Awȯ^,z[gozlos2>ފ=6QeFc9 3g,UkyG <+r u;0llzX51[ttQӂ8 SQOl}w'Ms3fa-GP&^yǠQ/t_6Ófn p8:nXk-ㆵeZ[x]pq b.״3-1jdtg$ѯҲ+=Wʓ>O!6JQ8HSNnKĵƕܲܓ[}S\5䘲<|`m>O6_1|y| {Y0sWc,5T?Yfun-߹[_6':Z;3yC)Z0Wwa|u֨Z|x  |ź-B~ <-w3yyfع9ͣ>'eX[>wY3d@~cǺl GttniP^'^\k@s4IXj˺?7fT _p.$_ g˳p6_zAE%`V>y_' 3JgJOP N:|ŠqCkK-?-Rdi֣.O{{!}EeO(N8X"όK3]z9,ENyhW>(Bˏ囱\=~FHe4-8=[Ұ.7,*Nau_Y1v bF& ǚ]rL2/k.Syk.e- { 2zj`|C]4ݬĨ&{ke|(X;aĸp{U**EKX>OӈubC͎/e훭-daR=W}n8L*\QZpU5\UUep,j᪱|T\u WpY>L\Y׵8քb?1*ŽaV-1 7 \% RR\\q5-1߯q5YW:W:B\ LL\\q,rr,\^\\q,jj[pp#ĵbk%d\<Qx })?~F%(   w`Worksheet Excel.Sheet.802Microsoft Excel Worksheet./ 0`DTimes New RomanT0Wo 0PDArialNew RomanT0Wo 0P" DWingdingsRomanT0Wo 0P0DArial BlackmanT0Wo 0P"@DArial Unicode MS0Wo 0P"PDCourier Newe MS0Wo 0P1`DTahoma Newe MS0Wo 0P"pDSymbol Newe MS0Wo 0Pc .  @n?" dd@  @@``  " ( 4  X[9  / ! "#o2$or،@V9Mcb$?" dZ@$?lKd@   l@  P`lA n?" dd@   @@``PR    @ ` ` p>>    (  8  `  0?`  0?"   `gֳgֳG.*?p` :   Zgֳgֳ ?@  T Click to edit Master title style! !f  Tgֳgֳ ?@<$ 0  RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S  Zgֳgֳ ? @  \*   Zgֳgֳ ?:Z   \*   Zgֳgֳ ?5  `*8   f"   6G?   C BCDEF?$$|pcWLA 7-%%,4 =FPZdnx %-7ALWcp||IL@  < ?"0 >(2   TAL Y? ?"mH  0޽h? ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ Capsules;     @ { (     Zt#gֳgֳ?@  : "   ``#gֳgֳG.*?pp  :   Z#gֳgֳ ?4   # W#Click to edit Master subtitle style$ $8       f"   6G? R    C BCDEF?$$R[bjry %,4=FPZdnxyrjb[RRIL@L    Z#gֳgֳ ? @  # `*  ZI#gֳgֳ ?    # \*  ZM#gֳgֳ ?x # `*  Z#gֳgֳ ?NnR # T Click to edit Master title style! !H  0޽h? ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙t 0 4,`(    Ta#gֳgֳ ?P   # P*    T#gֳgֳ ?   # R*  j  s *1 ?  #:  Tg#gֳgֳ ? @ # RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S  ZPi#gֳgֳ ?`P  # P*    Zm#gֳgֳ ?`  # R*  H  0޽h? ? ̙33 0(    Tgֳgֳ ?P    X*   Tgֳgֳ ?    Z*   Z@6gֳgֳ ?`P   X*   Z@6gֳgֳ ?`   Z* H  0޽h? ? ̙33 LD0(     T@y#gֳgֳ ? NnR #    Ty#gֳgֳ ? 4   # ^  6?  ^  6A?P 0(x  BA ?"p QH  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙  p:(  r  S @46@  6   S 96@ 6 "  @H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙   $(   r   S N6@  6 r   S O6@ 6 H   0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙  P(  r  S #@  #   S #@<$  0 # H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙"  b(  x  c $#@  #   s *#`@<$ 0 # H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙c   (     Zgֳgֳ ?@   z 0  0,$D  0  )    ) ,$D  0f  6A? )    `(?Q j  5EFP  Tgֳgֳ?`0 q,$D 0 QElectronic Filing Providers(2_  T,[bgֳgֳ?p ,$D  0 iFront End applications. Developed by variety of legal software vendors, for specific or general purposes.j(2j0z 0 0   00 ,$D  0N  q     q f   6A? q     `db? Q *  5EFM   T^bgֳgֳ? 0 q OElectronic Filing Manager(2"  TLkbgֳgֳ?0  `Document, image management providing persistent storage of XML documents; interface to CMS data.a(2az  Q A    Q A ,$D  0f   6BaC!DELFT1X)?llllHll  `Hll'(@ Q A    `8ob?A Y   7XMLz  08  0 8,$D  0N 8 8)   8 8) f  6A?8 8)    `hsb?Q   5CMS  Tvbgֳgֳ?0q LCase Management System(2!  Tzbgֳgֳ?  _Back End system. Developed by vendors or courts, wide variety within and between jurisdictions.`(2`N  A    A f   6BaC!DELFT1))?llllHll  `Hll'(@ A    `Db?A   7APIH  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙   \(  x  c $b@  b   c $b@<$  0 b H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙L   @(  r  S Lb@  b   S ,b@ <$  0 b 4l `   `,$D  0]  Tģbgֳgֳ ?`   _LEGAL HORIZONTAL TECHNICAL COURT FILING APPELLATE COURT FILING TRANSCRIPTS PUBLIC LAW CONTRACTS@` lK 338S  Tbgֳgֳ ?H  YRESEARCH INTEGRATED JUSTICE USERS SIGNATURES POLICY ADMINISTRATION CHAIRS COMMUNICATIONS <Y lK lKZH  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙Y !  ` .(  r  S l@b@  b r @   . #"*      @   H4B?"`   TIn-house   @`  H(?B?" `  X Small Claims   @`  HB?"@   V Sacramento   @`  Ho;?"`p   X ISD, Image-X   @`  Ho;?"p `  QCivil @`  H~;?"@p   ZSan Bernardino @`  HІ;?"`P p  X ISD, Image-X   @`  H;?"P `p  QCivil @`  H;?"@P p  U Riverside   @`   H:;?"`0 P  R@Court @`   HDY;?"0 `P  QCivil @`   H];?"@0 P  SAlameda @`   H;?"`0  SCT, West, JusticeLink  @`   H a;?"`0  bFamily, Civil, Probate @`  H;?"@0  ROrange @`  H;f?"`  W Providers   @`  H ;f?" ` X Case Types   @`  HO;f?"@  SCourt @`B  Bo ?"@  zB  <1 ?"@zB  <1 ?"@0 0 zB  <1 ?"@P P zB  <1 ?"@p p zB  <1 ?"@  B  Bo ?"@  B  Bo ?"@ @ zB  <1 ?"  zB   <1 ?"` ` B ! Bo ?"  H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ " \(  x  c $I;@  ;   c $;@<$ 0 ; H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ # P(  x  c $4 ;@  ;   NA ? ?"5 H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ % \(  x  c $';@  ;   c $];@<$ 0 ; H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙, & l(  x  c $(4@  4  @   #" @,$D 0;  < 4Ǹ?"  YLocationFunction NameFormat NameRole Height ScarsMarksTatoos Weight RoleName GroupStatus Zb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b B .$ @`;  <(4Ǹ?"  }DocumentType GroupType GroupQualifier GroupRelationship GroupStatusDateQualifier LocationId LocationQualifer RelatedLocation ~ b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b B  ~ @`  <,-4Ǹ?"  IENameType CourtType AddressType AddressStatus JudgeTitle CaseCategory Fb b b b b b b b b b b b B  F @`~  <|iǸ?"0  0AddressType AddressStatus PhoneType PhoneStatus 1 b b b b b b b b B  1 @`)  <iǸ?"@ 0 QGender MaritalStatus Citizenship Hair Ethnicity Religion EyeColor AddressCountry Rb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b B $ $ @`   Bm?"   `Unknown Difficulty  @`   B`?"    W Difficult    @`   Bػ?"   _Kind Of Difficult  @`   BX?"0  Z Kind Of Easy    @`   B,?"@ 0  REasy  @`zB  <o ?"@  tB  61 ?"@  zB  <o ?"@zB  <o ?"@ @tB  61 ?"0 0tB  61 ?"  tB  61 ?"  tB  61 ?" zB  <o ?" x  B ?"`@   6(ϸf?"ZP ` ,$D 0 ^EFP Civil Initial Complaint 4(2[ 2   3  3     3   3  3     3 P    .  6rf?"Z` ,$D 0 *CMS Case_Type := CV Action_Code := C1234 @(2' 2%    <޸ ?"@` P -Source: Ken McKelvey, Wisconsin AOC/Legal XML. 2.  l P 0 ZP & ,$D 0  6Gf?" 0 EFM 4(2 2 ,zR  <f?"P P zR  <f?"cH  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ $ P(  r  S T6@  6   S U6@<$  0 6 H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ '  P(  r  S <@     S d@<$  0  H  0޽h ? 3f3fff̙3ff̙ 0 Ph(     T1 ?   #   T#gֳgֳ ? @  # xPresented by Tom Smith, IT\Decision, TJSmith@ITDecision.com 0=!,% H  0޽h ? ̙33! 0 q(  X  C    #  S # @  # sCThe Legislature requires the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules for e-filing and service by January 1, 2003. Given the customary review review and approval processes of the Judicial Council and the various subcommittees involved in this subject area, we must draft those uniform rules by the end of this calendar year.DDH  0޽h ? ̙33 0 T(  X  C      S # @   VIn 1999 the Legislature enacted provisions of the Civil Code of Procedure addressing uniform statewide electronic filing and service of court documents. The operative words here are  standardized and  statewide . The prohibitions are equally clear: no  specialized, cumbersome, or expensive equipment or software  that would serve to deny access to some population of litigants or practitioners. H  0޽h ? ̙33 0 ~v(  X  C    v  S  @   CCP 1010.6 also sets forth certain rules that will be reflected in statewide uniform Rules of Court. So some of the issues that usually arise in e-filing ventures have already been addressed by SB 367. Of course, there are many more issues that will arise. Our primary purpose is defining technical standards to make uniform statewide e-filing practical, and secondarily to make recommendations about rules. Interpret this as meaning that we will not get bogged down in endless debates about social policy. With regard to court mandated e-filing for certain types of cases class action, these include  consolidated action, or a group of actions, a coordinated action, or an action that is deemed complex under Judicial Council rules . 62H  0޽h ? ̙338 0 (    Z1 ?   b  Zbgֳgֳ ? @  b This, then, is the model we envision for California. We assume there will be multiple vendors providing electronic filing services to the bar and public end users. EFPs will chose their UI paradigm: form-based, Q&A, or ???. EFPs will handle sales, marketing, and end user support. EFPs will handle payments to the courts and collections. We posit that an XML-based standard for court filings is the means by which EFPs can exchange filings and data with courts. Based on an XML standard for court filings, courts and their respective CMS vendors will be able to develop interfaces to their case management systems capable of accepting filings from and returning confirmations to any EFP. One interface per CMS. (5H  0޽h ? ̙33n 0 .& (  ^ S      c $>b @   " In formulating our approach, we have established the following assumptions: Heterogeneous CMS population: we do not have a statewide CMS, and that isn t going to change anytime soon. E-filing solutions must work with the existing installed base. Attorneys are cross-jurisdictional: the typical attorney files in more than one court. E-filing should have consistent look and feel: for frequent users (the Bar) consistency is important. Courts don t do end user support: they have enough to do supporting their own end user community. Neither do they do sales or marketing. Courts are resource constrained: in particular, few courts have the technical resources and budget to build comprehensive e-filing services. One e-filing interface per CMS: individual courts can t afford multiple e-filing interfaces: few if any courts have the resources to develop or support a single e-filing interface, much less several. Assume a court with 2 case management systems (civil, and criminal); it would need 2 interfaces for one EFP, 4 interfaces for 2 EFPs, 8 interfaces for 4 EFPs, etc. Exchange data with CMSs: the prime benefit for the court comes from automated interaction with the cms. Without data exchange the burden of data entry and response remains with staff. No monopolies for e-filing: one alternative would be to award an e-filing monopoly to a single contractor (as Colorado has). This would simplify the problem in some respects, but not eliminate the major challenges. We assume this is inappropriate for a jurisdiction and the state as a whole.LPKvH  0޽h ? ̙33 0 0&(  ^ S    b c $Мb @  b To summarize, then, we can state our objectives: Introduce a standard for court filings: a standard enables development of a single interface between all e-filing service providers and each CMS. It is a prerequisite for the next objective. Foster a competitive environment for e-filing: this strategy allows the courts to leverage the resources of the private sector without picking the winners: market forces will do that. Universal, comprehensive service. By universal we mean all courts, all case types, all filings, all user communities. We wish to handle all types of filings, exhibits, payments, and everything else electronically. Prepare recommendations in 2000. Year end 2000 is our deadline for recommending technical standards.1H  0޽h ? ̙33 0 F>P(  X  C    >  S Db @   In April the state s Electronic Filing Working Group decided to support the standards-setting activity of Legal XML. In essence, California s standards-setting effort is Legal XML s effort. If you ve had the opportunity to work with Legal XML, you ve probably come to realize that it draws from a national audience with some pretty good court and technical expertise. Todd Vincent will fill you in on Legal XML; some of its Workgroups are shown here. Bob Marx will speak on the draft version 1 Proposed Curt Filing standard after Todd. We will use the California Workgroup site as the primary means of communicating with the e-filing community of interest: it is important that you participate in those exchanges to represent your views. H  0޽h ? ̙33  0 pa(  X  C    B  S ; @  B c-We are aware of the following e-filing projects, all of which are in their early stages. There are other providers who have expressed interest in engaging in pilots (Law-On-Line, American LegalNet). In general we find that courts are challenged in implementing e-filing. It is not a simple transition.jH  0޽h ? ̙33  0 3(  ^ S     c $PK; @   )In response, the AOC is considering a program for partially funding a limited number of pilot projects. These are the specific objectives we have enumerated for the program. The criteria for selecting pilot projects will be based directly on these objectives. Any suggestions?H  0޽h ? ̙33*  0 z(  ^ S    ; c $l4 @  ; p\The software the program would fund is the EFM, with features as indicated in the table. This table derives from requirements identified by OXCI, the Open XML Court Interface group recently founded in March. We expect to see development of capabilities as indicated under the  First Generation column.H  0޽h ? ̙33n  0 .&(  X  C    &  S @16 @   In this project our philosophy is to work cooperatively with judicial and private sector interests to achieve a consensus on how e-filing will operate in California. The alternative is that we go off and write some rules that you will all have to live with, good or bad. CEFTS will provide: Forum for reaching consensus. The CAWG will be the instrument by which we keep all interested parties in synch with developments. Moderated discussion threads. We will moderate discussions to some extent. XML expertise, as applied to Court Filing spec. Bob Marx is available to provide assistance in interpreting the Court Filing spec, and in representing the need for desired changes to the Court Filing Workgroup. Financial assistance to pilot courts. Assuming AOC provides funds. An advocate for courts and providers.We will try to bring trial courts and service providers together where the fit seems right.#dH  0޽h ? ̙33  0 B :  (  ^ S    44  c $4 @  4 6 To put it to use, we expect refinement of the version 1 standard, and we as a community probably need to address: Missing Elements: there may be elements we need for some CMSs in California. Sanctioned Extensibility: vendors have requested a means for extending the standard without violating the rules. Now under discussion in Legal XML. Compliance levels: we may find that we need to categorize EFM capabilities into formal compliance levels. Certification: to ensure interoperability, certification of EFM software may be the most efficient mechanism. Policy Management: related in sme respects to Compliance and Certification, this is the means by which EFPs would discover the capabilities of an EFM/CMS. Bob will talk about this later. Payment mechanisms: how remittances are made to courts also need definition. DocumentContent: Legal XML has defined the envelope and an enclosed coversheet. Next we need to define the document itself. EFM development: Wisconsin and Arizona have discussed developing an open source EFM  may provide a basis for some California vendors and courts. Code Standardization: shall we attempt to define a California Rosetta stone (next slide)?s)PEYH  0޽h ? ̙33  0 b Z (  ^ S    T c $O6 @   To understand one of the barriers to statewide e-filing, consider the problem introduced by the uniqueness of each of the several hundred case management systems: they are all table-based, and they all use different codes to represent entries in those tables. EFPs will use their own sets of  codes , probably customer-oriented values. Translation has to occur somewhere, in our model in the EFM. Assume a world of 10 EFPs and 200 CMSs. That s 2,000 mapping exercises between EFPs and courts. If we could develop a  Rosetta Stone of standardized codes, we could simplify the problem to 210 mapping exercises (10 EFPs to the  Rosetta codes plus 200 CMSs to the  Rosetta codes ). A first step in this direction is being undertaken by Legal XML, and some of this work is already reflected in the version 1 standard (see table). There are many Legal XML participants who don t think this approach is possible, and it remains to be seen how far the effort will get. >!7H  0޽h ? ̙33 0  K(  X  C    6  S tʸ @  6 MCooperation, with CEFTS, with courts, with other providers. Participation in the proceedings of the California Workgroup and other Legal XML Workgroups. Straight talk with us about your concerns and objectives. Realization that e-filing will not happen if everyone works independently.H  0޽h ? ̙33;xY[l\Gٳڹx44!v8N IC8ӔqP@5rwgCv8{ζq 4BB<ҮTR\TF%PE CxVT*>|Y{oulTۙ??i;~CUho2N CHh? @x4N?L:NY9^ mR]]3pn:1>ZZSNQĊtfҵ,-A|Dk ϝgQ0AYuXW@*Hc5׀57@ DItOmځ[`p&p;;m@7lz>`]n  ~~$!#ǂ)uc9N)/ _m<_4~үHCh}.?:T4r^k|#50s`4`^V"Jfsy *ej w3, c݁_`&Mxwy"U1*WZUK6LbwbvZPX*]Sz:Ecn@{4!v6`hJ7%v* JR97iTnɜ7nӨV,wj87"S[Lrrk]\X7Rh!sZh!FSd|K!~KjzIr ~x BA'fffXOAtf!Ÿς)g}YT J!d,~EE׮]xʧ,xH3vTHW\x1%w8P/q[5W/xt"s\r_iᔠSNʉŒKW~N2`UH/DKQ:]|^zL!G͓+r;sȨ< ĎD1*=Gi\9HoV?f`kF+ |niyEQ^Ԇ~Z7(_^u`JBt]_ ~w ~`M=t/ Z"%R%B K[[.s̚ yVIBtՔ ad9M&sA)BeeKQG.\G\c\3 }Lv{Z\9Yۥ ;tzgdov̏YzI.&͌Y۞fL圌y|xԕ2GGθ=J|#-[mDoNIC/׆P|y8-dM'e&Tկ핣ІPޛtr#_\qZ=;cytE6)rtC؆+ٜu %pM;9&M 1'Ma%&|־lVdT*2~ц(f۠h;zNRW"\nIjõaIۉi3ceVs`;^dӶ7VSI\Am(W֌,+^л u &ʉExJ4>-\I M˞s٪ '`+avaZ n1TIgE(u2( @;y$=@-/'%fj)-l |N _k{:a'Զ ݿ:5}_{SVlI% [#87wh ={ϙtRWkTxeMÓS|;AYL0}0qaՕ`96;8H4$d|\Y{_C/#̰R7;,W_S'}oQpISs|?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root EntrydO)Pictures>+Current UserSummaryInformation(RPowerPoint Document(DocumentSummaryInformation8