Cases from cite.case.law:

BLAKE, E. S. T. v. ST. JOHNS RIVER POWER PARK SYSTEM EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN,, 275 So. 3d 804 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Plan section 7.06(2) requires all actions of the Committee to be uniform and nondiscriminatory, and other . . .

DEFINITIVE MARINE SURVEYS INC. v. TRAN, A. T. a A. T. a, 339 F. Supp. 3d 1292 (M.D. Fla. 2018)

. . . Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions and Local Admiralty Rule 7.06 . . .

IN RE BRANNON, L. v. T., 584 B.R. 417 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2018)

. . . rights may be preempted by a trustee in bankruptcy. 1-7 Collier Family Law and the Bankruptcy Code P 7.06 . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. J. P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC,, 266 F. Supp. 3d 225 (D.D.C. 2017)

. . . And while March 2007’s delinquencies diminished slightly (to 3.77% and 7.06%), this mild reprieve did . . .

PE A, v. GREFFET, 110 F. Supp. 3d 1103 (D.N.M. 2015)

. . . principal is negligent in selecting, supervising, or otherwise controlling the agent; or (c) as stated in § 7.06 . . .

YALE- NEW HAVEN HOSPITAL, v. M. NICHOLLS, v., 788 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2015)

. . . Shulman, Qualified Domestic Relations Order Handbook § 7.06 (3d ed. 2014) ("Although some ... might consider . . .

OCAMPO, v. BUILDING SERVICE J PENSION FUND, J, 787 F.3d 683 (2d Cir. 2015)

. . . in their sole and absolute discretion, to administer, apply and interpret the Plan” (Pension Plan § 7.06 . . . to ... formulate ... policies necessary to administer the Plan in accordance with its terms” (id. § 7.06 . . . “make all decisions with respect to the eligibility for ... benefits payable under the Plan” (id. § 7.06 . . . their authorized delegate(s) determine, in their sole and absolute discretion as provided in Section 7.06 . . . District Court Opinion, 2014 WL 687227, at *4-*5 (quoting Pension Plan § 7.06(a)). . . .

ESTATE OF HEENAN, HEENAN, v. CITY OF MADISON In, 111 F. Supp. 3d 929 (W.D. Wis. 2015)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1988 Litigation: Claims & Defenses § 7.06[A] (4th ed.2015). . . .

In CITIGROUP ERISA LITIGATION, 104 F. Supp. 3d 599 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . .- Citigroup Plan § 7.06; Citibuilder Plan § 7.06. . . .

G. MOORE, Jr. v. HARTMAN, G. Jr. v., 102 F. Supp. 3d 35 (D.D.C. 2015)

. . . //www.lb5.uscourts.gov/jury instructions/; Federal Civil Jury Instructions of the Seventh Circuit § 7.06 . . .

HARDY, v. CITY OF MILWAUKEE, Jr. Jr., 88 F. Supp. 3d 852 (E.D. Wis. 2015)

. . . Compare (Docket #203 at 20-21) with Seventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions — Civil, §§ 7.05, 7.06. . . .

P. MUSGROVE, v. BROOKINGS INSTITUTION,, 78 F. Supp. 3d 496 (D.D.C. 2015)

. . . . § 7.06(B), PLAN-00044 (“No amendment to the Plan shall be effective to the extent that it has the effect . . .

HERRERA, T. H. a v. SANTA FE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Fe J. Fe J. Fe Fe a ASI LLC,, 41 F. Supp. 3d 1188 (D.N.M. 2014)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation Claims & Defenses, § 7.06[A] (2013), available at Westlaw SNETLCD. . . .

MURAKAMI- WOLF- SWENSON, INC. v. A. COLE, d b a ACME- TV LLC,, 40 F. Supp. 3d 1365 (D. Or. 2014)

. . . Nimmer on Copyright § 7.06[A] (citations omitted). . . .

E. FISCHER, M. L. v. UNITED STATES A., 996 F. Supp. 2d 724 (W.D. Wis. 2014)

. . . Restatement (Third) of Agency § 7.06, Cmt. b (“If an employee commits a tort ... while acting within . . . Restatement (Third) of Agency § 7.06, Cmt. d (purely personal acts such as eating may be within scope . . .

In MILLER, A. v., 500 B.R. 578 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2013)

. . . Madden, Tax Planning for Highly Compensated Individuals, ¶¶ 7.06, 7.06[1] (2000) (cited in In re Pepmeyer . . .

In PERRY H. KOPLIK SONS, INC. S. H. v., 499 B.R. 276 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)

. . . to comply with the Investment limitations and Nature of Business limitations set forth in Sections 7.06 . . .

IN RE S. MCDONALD, s, 497 B.R. 489 (Bankr. D.S.C. 2013)

. . . Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 7.06[1] (16th ed. 2012). . . .

SCHNEIDER, v. CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION POLICE DEPARTMENT, D. A., 717 F.3d 760 (10th Cir. 2013)

. . . Schwartz, Section 1983 Litigation Claims & Defenses, § 7.06[A] (2013), available at Westlaw SNETLCD. . . .

J. MALMSTEEN, v. UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, INC. UMG, 940 F. Supp. 2d 123 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)

. . . Relevant here, under § 7.06, Malmsteen is entitled to a 50% royalty on Records sold by such methods, . . . Agreement § 7.06(a)(ii). . . . Malmsteen argues that the 50% royalty rate set forth in § 7.06(a)(ii) applies. . . . Agreement § 7.06(a)(ii). The sale of digital downloads does not resemble any of these methods. . . . See Agreement § 7.06(a)(iii). . . .

BERGE HELENE LTD. v. GE OIL GAS, INC., 896 F. Supp. 2d 582 (S.D. Tex. 2012)

. . . Id. at 14-15 ¶ 7.06; PX 131, at 57 ¶46.5. . PX 131, at 57 ¶ 46.5. . . . .

In PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION CO., 944 F. Supp. 2d 363 (E.D. Pa. 2012)

. . . The Consummation Order provided in § 7.06 that this court’s jurisdiction over the reorganization proceedings . . .

In P. D AMORE, III, LLC, LLC, v. P. D III,, 472 B.R. 679 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2012)

. . . B. at § 7.06. . See also City of Roseville Employees’ Ret. Sys. v. . . .

SAVANI, v. WASHINGTON SAFETY MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, f k a LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC LLC WSMS f k a f k a LLC f k a LLC s LLC, f k a LLC,, 474 F. App'x 310 (4th Cir. 2012)

. . . amendments” under Article 7.01 of the Plan and the "discretion to interpret the Plan” under Article 7.06 . . .

In ENRON CORPORATION SECURITIES, DERIVATIVE ERISA LITIGATION. v. I, L. L. C. II, L. L. C. L. L. C. v., 279 F.R.D. 395 (S.D. Tex. 2011)

. . . Plaintiffs insist that under section 7.06 in each Note Agreement, Prudential had the right to create . . .

CLARETT, v. ROBERTS,, 657 F.3d 664 (7th Cir. 2011)

. . . Pattern Civil Jury Instruction 7.06. . . .

UNITED STATES, v. K. BAKER, U. S., 70 M.J. 283 (C.A.A.F. 2011)

. . . failed to consider necessary factors. 2 Steven Childress & Martha Davis, Federal Standards of Review § 7.06 . . .

BYROM, v. EPPS,, 817 F. Supp. 2d 868 (N.D. Miss. 2011)

. . . otherwise contained the factors required by Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court Practice (“URCCC”) 7.06 . . .

W. COSTELLO, v. R. GRUNDON,, 625 F.3d 342 (7th Cir. 2010)

. . . However, section 7.06 of the Facility Agreement provides: No Collateral. . . .

W. COSTELLO, v. R. GRUNDON,, 625 F.3d 342 (7th Cir. 2010)

. . . However, section 7.06 of the Facility Agreement provides: No Collateral. . . .

FINISAR CORPORATION, a v. U. S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a a v. U. S. a a v. U. S. a, 391 F. App'x 657 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . The district court did not err in holding that USB was entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees under § 7.06 . . . against Finisar’s declaratory judgment action, it was entitled to recover its attorney’s fees under § 7.06 . . . Section 7.06 only entitles USB to “reasonable” attorney’s fees, and the district court appropriately . . . entitled to recover its own reasonable attorney’s fees because California Civil Code § 1717 applied to § 7.06 . . .

SAVANI, v. WASHINGTON SAFETY MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS LLC,, 703 F. Supp. 2d 529 (D.S.C. 2010)

. . . Do not materially increase costs to the Plan, or (C) Clarify ambiguous or unclear Plan provisions, 7.06 . . . App’x 89; § 7.06.) . . . In light of this controlling precedent and the discretion conferred on the Benefits Committee by § 7.06 . . .

In SECURITY CAPITAL ASSURANCE, LTD. SECURITIES LITIGATION, 729 F. Supp. 2d 569 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . his position from the SCA Board of Directors; shares of SCA rose from $4.44 on November 26, 2007 to $7.06 . . . CEO of XL Capital resigned his position, the shares of SCA rose from $4.44 on November 26, 2007 to $7.06 . . .

CITY OF DEARBORN HEIGHTS ACT POLICE FIRE RETIREMENT SYSTEM, v. WATERS CORPORATION, A. A., 699 F. Supp. 2d 331 (D. Mass. 2010)

. . . Ornell’s total holdings including options (excluding options not yet exercisable), he actually only sold 7.06% . . .

CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,, 697 F. Supp. 2d 213 (D. Mass. 2010)

. . . In addition, Section 7.07 of the TRA states: Except as otherwise provided in Section 7.01 through 7.06 . . . first phrase of the section, which provides: “Except as otherwise provided in Section 7.01 through 7.06 . . . A, at 8 (“Except as otherwise provided in Section 7.01 through 7.06, of this ARTICLE 7.”)). . . .

WACHOVIA BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, v. ENCAP GOLF HOLDINGS, LLC, v. LLC, v. LLC, II, SFT I,, 690 F. Supp. 2d 311 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)

. . . . §§ 7.05 and 7.06.) The MAC-TEC contract also requires EnCap to obtain various forms of insurance. . . .

LAW DEBENTURE TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK, v. MAVERICK TUBE CORP. S. A., 595 F.3d 458 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . (See Indenture §§ 7.06(f), 1.01, at 10.) . . .

FITZPATRICK, D. F. a v. CITY OF FORT WAYNE, 679 F. Supp. 2d 947 (N.D. Ind. 2009)

. . . concept of probable cause, employing the language from the Seventh Circuit’s pattern jury instruction No. 7.06 . . .

In KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION. C. A. No., 647 F. Supp. 2d 644 (E.D. La. 2009)

. . . Plaintiff Norman Robinson resided at 6965 Mayo Boulevard and his house was 7.06 below sea level. . . .

Dr. A. SUMMERS, Dr. M. T. Dr. v. S. ADAMS,, 669 F. Supp. 2d 637 (D.S.C. 2009)

. . . No. 36, 40 (notices of hearing); Local Civil Rule 7.06, D.S.C. . . .

G. GIBBONS, v. D. O. FRONTON, 661 F. Supp. 2d 429 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Fronton found that Gibbons had a minimally enlarged prostate and that his PSA levels were elevated to 7.06 . . .

UNITED STATES v. FOUSE III,, 578 F.3d 643 (7th Cir. 2009)

. . . the years following Silvern, we have also approved the modified Silvern instruction set forth in § 7.06 . . . But we do not require district courts to replicate verbatim either the Silvern or § 7.06 instructions . . . Hamann, 688 F.2d 507, 511 (7th Cir.1982) (explaining that district court’s additions to language of § 7.06 . . . Yet both the Silvern and § 7.06 instructions encourage jurors to reexamine their views and, if warranted . . . repetition of the approved language, is substantively indistinguishable from the language of Silvern and § 7.06 . . .

FAIR ISAAC CORPORATION v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS INC. LLC LLC I X,, 645 F. Supp. 2d 734 (D. Minn. 2009)

. . . . § 7.06; NextGen Agreement § 12.1; Horizon Agreement § 12.1, TU-FI-1260027; • “[N]either party shall . . . Classic Agreement §§ 6.05, 7.06; NextGen Agreement § 12.1; Horizon Agreement § 12. 1, TU-FI-1260027. . . .

GREEN PARTY OF CONNECTICUT, S. P. C. C. v. GARFIELD, N. A. J., 590 F. Supp. 2d 288 (D. Conn. 2008)

. . . contributions from lobbyist PACs increases the amount contributed by lobbyists and lobbyist PACs to 7.06% . . .

SHELTON, v. KING, SMCI, 548 F. Supp. 2d 288 (S.D. Miss. 2008)

. . . To that end, Rule 7.06 of the Uniform Rules of the Circuit and County Court Practice states that an indictment . . .

G. GIBBONS, v. FRONTON, D. O. M. D., 533 F. Supp. 2d 449 (S.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . PSA”) levels of 5.52 on November 21, 2001, 7.07 on September 10, 2002, 6.98 on December 10, 2002, and 7.06 . . .

In FINISAR CORP. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION, 542 F. Supp. 2d 980 (N.D. Cal. 2008)

. . . 2001 Grant Plaintiffs allege that on April 3, 2001 Finisar granted options with an exercise price of $7.06 . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOYD,, 256 F. App'x 890 (8th Cir. 2007)

. . . On December 13, 2005, Boyd distributed 7.06 grams of cocaine base to a person cooperating with the government . . .

A. FULTON, v. R. McKUNE,, 250 F. App'x 263 (10th Cir. 2007)

. . . did not become final until November 13, 2000, because, inter alia, under Kansas Supreme Court Rule 7.06 . . .

INTERNATIONAL EQUITY INVESTMENTS, INC. v. OPPORTUNITY EQUITY PARTNERS, LTD. f. k. a. CVC, 475 F. Supp. 2d 456 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . . § 7.06. See generally Int’l Equity Invests., Inc. v. . . .

INTERNATIONAL EQUITY INVESTMENTS, INC. v. OPPORTUNITY EQUITY PARTNERS LTD., 475 F. Supp. 2d 450 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . B § 7.06. . 996 F.2d 1353 (2d Cir.1993) . Id. at 1361. . N.Y. CPLR § 302(a)(1). . . . .

G. I. v., 127 T.C. 124 (T.C. 2006)

. . . Proc. 2000-39, sec. 7.06, 2000-2 C.B. at 346; Rev. . . . Proc. 2001-47, sec. 7.06, 2001-2 C.B. at 339; Rev. . . . Proc. 2002-63, sec. 7.06, 2002-2 C.B. at 699; Rev. Proc. 2003-80, sec. 7.06, 2003-2 C.B. at 1045. . . .

P. DAVIDSON, v. R. McKUNE,, 191 F. App'x 746 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . R. 7.06, it does appear that Mr. . . .

E. SHIFTLET, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO., 451 F. Supp. 2d 763 (D.S.C. 2006)

. . . R. 7.06 (“If no memorandum in opposition is filed within fifteen (15) days of the date of service, the . . .

HOUR FITNESS USA, INC. v. TRIBECA FITNESS, LLC,, 447 F. Supp. 2d 266 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . Only 7.06% of 24/7’s members are from New Jersey and Long Island. Id. . . .

MILLS, v. R. McKUNE,, 186 F. App'x 828 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . Under Kansas Supreme Court Rule 7.06, a party has twenty days from the date the Kansas Supreme Court . . .

B. SIMMONS, v. L. E. BRUCE,, 173 F. App'x 709 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . R. 7.06 (“A motion for rehearing ... may be served and filed within twenty (20) days of the date of decision . . .

LIMANTOUR, v. CRAY INCORPORATED, E. J. R. J. W., 432 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (W.D. Wash. 2006)

. . . as follows: 1.Johnson Johnson sold 39,000 shares of Cray stock during the Class Period, representing 7.06% . . . In this case, Rottsolk, Johnson, Kiefer, and Poteraeki sold 4.01, 7.06, 14.4, and 25.05 percent of their . . .

STEWART, v. J. BLACKWELL,, 444 F.3d 843 (6th Cir. 2006)

. . . For example, in Chicago, the rate was 7.06% citywide, 12.59% in the 12th ward, 12.4% in the 37th ward . . .

THOME, v. ROBERTS, El, 176 F. App'x 929 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . Rule 7.06 of the Kansas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that such motions must be filed within twenty . . .

J. SIKIRICA, v. NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY J., 416 F.3d 214 (3d Cir. 2005)

. . . Cinski was charged $9.15, but the cost of the materials was only $7.06. . . .

J. SIKIRICA, v. NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY J., 416 F.3d 214 (3d Cir. 2005)

. . . Cinski was charged $9.15, but the cost of the materials was only $7.06. . . .

DOE, v. CELEBRITY CRUISES, INC. M V ZENITH,, 394 F.3d 891 (11th Cir. 2004)

. . . Restatement (Third) of Agency § 7.06 (Tentative Draft No. 5, 2004). . . . Id. § 7.06, cmt. a. . . .

BUSH H. v. D. HOLMES, E. H. NAACP a k a PTA AFT AFL- CIO, a Jr. F., 886 So. 2d 340 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Gidman addressed whether section 7.06 of the city’s charter, which prohibited the expenditure of city . . . The Supreme Court interpreted section 7.06 of the charter to allow the expenditure of city funds to a . . .

DASCOTT, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, a, 877 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See Merit System 7.06 A.5.a. . . .

GEORGIA, v. ASHCROFT,, 204 F. Supp. 2d 4 (D.D.C. 2002)

. . . in S.D. 44, - 14.91%; in S.D. 22, -12.00%; in S.D. 55, - 11.76%; in S.D. 15, -11.18%; in S.D. 26, - 7.06% . . .

RJE CORP. v. NORTHVILLE INDUSTRIES CORP., 198 F. Supp. 2d 249 (E.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . See Stock Purchase Agreement § 7.06; Option Agreement § 7.04; PPAA § 10; see also Stock Purchase Agreement . . . See Stock Purchase Agreement § 7.06 (incorporating the terms of the other agreements); Option Agreement . . .

BLACK, v. M. MCGUFFAGE,, 209 F. Supp. 2d 889 (N.D. Ill. 2002)

. . . For example, in Chicago, the rate was 7.06% citywide, 12.59% in the 12th ward, 12.4% in the 37th ward . . .

CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, v. MOTOROLA, INC., 184 F. Supp. 2d 384 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . perform any covenant, condition or agreement contained in [inter alia \ Article VII (other than Sections 7.06 . . .

In W. PEPMEYER,, 273 B.R. 782 (N.D. Iowa 2002)

. . . Madden, Tax Planning for Highly Compensated Individuals, ¶ 7.06, 7.06[1] (2000) (cited in In re Kemmerer . . .

UNITED STATES v. P. McELHINEY,, 275 F.3d 928 (10th Cir. 2001)

. . . Federal Criminal Jury Instruction § 7.06 (1999 ed.); 8th Cir. . . .

D. SCHEMBRE, C. P. A. v. ORTH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,, 199 F. Supp. 2d 944 (E.D. Mo. 2001)

. . . Section 7.06 obligates Orth Construction to contribute to Local 527’s Pension Fund the sum of $5.62 per . . . Thus, sections 7.02 and 7.06 of the CBA, exempting defendant Orth Construction Company from Pension Fund . . .

CONNER v. S. W. PUCKETT,, 271 F. Supp. 2d 909 (S.D. Miss. 2001)

. . . Rule 7.06 of Mississippi’s Circuit and County Court Rules requires that an indictment upon which the . . .

In KAPLAN BRESLAW ASH, LLC,, 264 B.R. 309 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2001)

. . . See also Weintraub & Resnick, Bankruptcy Law Manual, ¶ 7.06[8] at page 7-61 (Value “may consist of .. . . .

UNITED STATES v. TAYLOR,, 9 F. App'x 465 (6th Cir. 2001)

. . . credibility of a drug-addicted informant, following the Sixth Circuit Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions § 7.06 . . . Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions § 7.06(B). . . .

In ENGINEERING ANIMATION SECURITIES LITIGATION, 203 F.R.D. 417 (S.D. Iowa 2001)

. . . .) $7.06 per share, or b.) the price they paid for their shares less $8.75. . . . 1999. . $21.69 was the value of a share of EAI at the end of the market's close on April 6, 1999. . $7.06 . . .

W. BUCE, v. ALLIANZ LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, f. k. a., 247 F.3d 1133 (11th Cir. 2001)

. . . jurisdictions expressly have rejected or repudiated this distinction. (3 Harnett & Lesnick, supra, § 7.06 . . .

UNITED STATES v. T. BALDWIN,, 54 M.J. 551 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 2000)

. . . Davis, Federal Standards of Review § 7.06 (3d ed.1999). . . .

NORTHLAND INSURANCE COMPANIES, v. BLAYLOCK,, 115 F. Supp. 2d 1108 (D. Minn. 2000)

. . . Epstein, Epstein on Intellectual Property § 7.06 (4th ed. 1999) (“The noncommercial use exception ‘is . . .

AGV PRODUCTIONS, INC. v. METRO- GOLDWYN- MAYER, INC. ORION PICTURES CORPORATION,, 115 F. Supp. 2d 378 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . (Foreign Distribution Agreement ¶¶ 5.01-5.02, 7.01, 7.06, 7.12, 8.06, Ex. A.) . . .

UNITED STATES v. VON BRIGGS,, 109 F. Supp. 2d 1004 (S.D. Ill. 2000)

. . . with the court reporter and a court security officer and reread Seventh Circuit pattern instruction 7.06 . . .

UNITED STATES v. COLLINS,, 223 F.3d 502 (7th Cir. 2000)

. . . however, consulted "with Collins and authorized the court to give Seventh Circuit pattern instruction 7.06 . . . Court: And do you wish the Court at this time to give the 7.06 instruction, is that right? . . .

In KEMMERER B. v., 251 B.R. 50 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2000)

. . . Madden, Tax Planning for Highly Compensated Individuals § 7.06, 7.06[1] (2000); see also In re Huebner . . .

In KEMMERER, 245 B.R. 335 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 2000)

. . . Madden, Tax Planning for Highly Compensated Individuals ¶ 7.06, 7.06[1] (2000). . . .

SKW v. De, 23 Ct. Int'l Trade 1000 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1999)

. . . Questionnaire Response of March 1, 1996, for the assertion that the monthly inflation rate for August 1994 was 7.06 . . . administrative record contains two inflation indices which show inflation rates for August 1994 of 7.56 % and 7.06 . . . An inflation rate of 7.06 % for the month of August translates into a 84.72 % annual inflation rate ( . . . calculated as 7.06 x 12 months, non-compounded), which is well above Commerce’s 50 % hyperinflationary . . .

AIMCOR SKW v. UNITED STATES,, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1248 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1999)

. . . Questionnaire Response of March 1, 1996, for the assertion that the monthly inflation rate for August 1994 was 7.06% . . . ministrative record contains two inflation indices which show inflation rates for August 1994 of 7.56% and 7.06% . . . An inflation rate of 7.06% for the month of August translates into a 84.72% annual inflation rate (calculated . . . as 7.06 x 12 months, non-compounded), which is well above Commerce’s 50% hyperinflationary threshold . . .

W. R. GRACE CO. CONN. v. INTERCAT, INC., 60 F. Supp. 2d 316 (D. Del. 1999)

. . . Accordingly, the price per pound of Grace’s lost sales is: $7.06 in 1993; $7.23 in 1994; and $7.52 in . . . Actual Selling Price (per pound) Grace’s Projected Selling Price (per pound) Price Differential 1993 $7.06 . . .

BEL- RAY COMPANY, INC. v. CHEMRITE PTY LTD. PTY H. PTY H., 181 F.3d 435 (3d Cir. 1999)

. . . Agreements in this case contain the following assignment provisions: (i) the Distributor Sales Agreement § 7.06 . . .

In VEBELIUNAS,, 231 B.R. 181 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . King, Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 7.06 at 1203 (14th ed.1978)). . . .

In RICKEL HOME CENTERS, INC., 240 B.R. 826 (D. Del. 1999)

. . . -65, 98th Cong. 1st Sess. 41 (1983); Collen, Buying and Selling Real Estate in Bankruptcy, (1997) ¶ 7.06 . . .

WYBLE, v. E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS CO. C., 17 F. Supp. 2d 641 (E.D. Tex. 1998)

. . . Art. 8306-7.06, and in the Texas Constitution, Art. 16, § 26. . . .

RENO v. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY,, 977 F. Supp. 812 (S.D. Tex. 1997)

. . . Eglit, Age Discrimination § 7.06 (2d ed.1997) (stating that a job applicant’s subjective belief that . . .

K. SHEALY, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,, 979 F. Supp. 395 (D.S.C. 1997)

. . . Local Rule 7.06, DSC. . . .

MOLETERNO, v. O. NELSON,, 114 F.3d 629 (7th Cir. 1997)

. . . Criminal No. 7.04 on the offense of voluntary manslaughter based on provocation, and IPI Criminal No. 7.06 . . . Reflecting the pre-Reddick and prestatutory revision law, both IPI Criminal Nos. 7.04 and 7.06 instructed . . . ) (now found at 720 Ill.Comp.Stat.Ann. 5/3-2(a)-(b) (West 1997)), IPI Criminal Nos. 7.02, 7.04, and 7.06 . . .

In DOTSON- CANNON, DOTSON- CANNON, v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,, 206 B.R. 530 (W.D. Mo. 1997)

. . . She now is employed as a clerk in the Wyandotte County, Kansas Criminal Court System, earning $7.06 an . . .

UNITED STATES v. HERNANDEZ,, 105 F.3d 1330 (9th Cir. 1997)

. . . See Instruction 7.06, Ninth Circuit Manual of Model Jury Instructions (Criminal) 98-99 (West 1995). . . .

M. CODY, v. M. WARD,, 954 F. Supp. 43 (D. Conn. 1997)

. . . Casad, Jurisdiction in Civil Actions § 7.06[3], at 7-89-90 and n. 244 (2d ed. 1991) (collecting eases . . .

CALLIS, v. UNION CARBIDE CHEM. AND PLASTICS CORP., 932 F. Supp. 168 (S.D. Tex. 1996)

. . . . § 8308-7.06, repealed by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., 2nd C.S., ch. 1, § 16.01(7) to (9), eff. . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. CUNNINGHAM,, 916 F. Supp. 817 (N.D. Ill. 1996)

. . . The court gave Seventh Circuit Instruction 7.06, which required the jury to "give fair and equal consideration . . .

SASSAFRAS ENTERPRISES, INC. v. ROSHCO, INC., 915 F. Supp. 1 (N.D. Ill. 1996)

. . . to be characterized as a source-indicator as opposed to mere ornamentation (see, e.g., 1 McCarthy §§ 7.06 . . .