Paste the Client Id and Client Secret in the Environment variables “envClientId” and “envClientSecret”. Paste the flow Id of your workflow in the corresponding collection variable.
This will generate a user profile identified by a unique x-hf-session token (returned in the header of the response). This identifier is required for next steps so paste the value in the corresponding collection variable and hit save. In the body, all the fields on the next form step are returned along with a
unique id for each field.
Path Variables flowid 652ffb712e470e32d625ba7e
curl --location 'https://api.workflow.prod.trulioo.com/interpreter-v2/flow/652ffb712e470e32d625ba7e'
{
"canGoBack": false,
"elements": [
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c459",
"name": "Name of business",
"role": "company_name",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c463",
"name": "Business registration number",
"role": "company_nr",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45a",
"name": "Country of incorporation",
"role": "company_country_incorporation",
"type": "country_select",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45d",
"name": "VAT number",
"role": "company_vat",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45e",
"name": "City",
"role": "company_city",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45f",
"name": "State",
"role": "company_state",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45b",
"name": "State Province",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
},
{
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45c",
"name": "ZIP code",
"role": "company_zip",
"type": "text",
"validations": [
{
"type": "required"
}
]
}
],
"id": "652ffb772e470e32d625ba7f",
"type": "form"
}
In the case of Business Verification, you need to send a business’ details required for Business Insights. In the body, include the ids of each field returned in Step 1 and the values for each field.
Path Variables flowid 652ffb712e470e32d625ba7e
{
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c459":"MICROSOFT CORPORATION",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c463":"600413485",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45a":"US",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45d":"91-1144442",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45e":"Redmond",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45f":"WA",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45b":"WA",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45c":"123"
}
curl --location 'https://api.workflow.prod.trulioo.com/interpreter-v2/submit/652ffb712e470e32d625ba7e' \
--header 'x-hf-session;' \
--data '{
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c459":"MICROSOFT CORPORATION",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c463":"600413485",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45a":"US",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45d":"91-1144442",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45e":"Redmond",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45f":"WA",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45b":"WA",
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45c":"123"
}'
{
"id": "652ffbe0c792412ab8e9c50f",
"type": "end"
}
You will need an authorization token in order to retrieve a user (Business user in this case) profile. Utilise Get Authorisation Token to retrieve a bearer token for Step 4. Paste the value in the accessToken collection variable.
Body urlencodedclient_id {{envClientId}} client_secret {{envClientSecret}} grant_type client_credentials scope workflow.studio.api
curl --location 'https://auth-api.trulioo.com/connect/token' \
--header 'Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded' \
--data-urlencode 'client_id={{envClientId}}' \
--data-urlencode 'client_secret={{envClientSecret}}' \
--data-urlencode 'grant_type=client_credentials' \
--data-urlencode 'scope=workflow.studio.api'
{
"access_token": "eyJhbGciOiJSUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IkQ0NENDOTU1RkQ1N0RGNjVBMDNDMTAyNkExRDkxODE0IiwidHlwIjoiSldUIn0.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.TFN77JHhAfKLS777qNoAdfzULwTWcH7KdYsCXBw22OKk5YFZCWGsS9u9TZNy3ZWfPLkCVXY9xl_cvfIyRQAmEirN54MYdvVst65QorXwU0ticF7ciZsTf3YHkKBFpCHzN5kZRBYr3L2fgEToqU68AElgTtxBzg1-GD2-xVsHc5makgR9YAiQZeQW17mMAhXTH18ShCnJ5GwDxzVkdSaqiEWNFnDXaMADY_G9Yx59YoX9cFf7TZhgAt198NmHE_-EEe5omK3FZHMU9JbQ0VlElPw5-bmRueSa75_B0NhTrFVYa7mVuvZEM5zGoM01JMyOUsETXv6j7pj2ggNtx_TVRA",
"expires_in": 1800,
"token_type": "Bearer",
"scope": "workflow.studio.api"
}
This will retrieve details of the user profile including data submitted for all fields and high level service response for the verification. You will get the Transaction Record IDs for each of the services run (Business Insights and Business Watchlist Screening). This is different from the Transaction Id which will not be used (Transaction Id - identifies a transaction when it is submitted and Transaction Record ID - identifies a transaction when it’s been completed). Paste the Transaction Record ID in the corresponding collection variable.
Path Variables x-hf-session
curl --location 'https://api.workflow.prod.trulioo.com/export/v2/query/client/:x-hf-session'
{
"id": "652ffdca3d000026006a4c3f",
"created": 1697643978,
"lastModified": 1697644271,
"profileType": "NORMAL",
"flowData": {
"652ffb712e470e32d625ba7e": {
"id": "652ffb712e470e32d625ba7e",
"completed": true,
"fieldData": {
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45d": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45d",
"name": "VAT number",
"value": [
"91-1144442"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45e": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45e",
"name": "City",
"value": [
"Redmond"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45a": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45a",
"name": "Country of incorporation",
"value": [
"US"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45f": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45f",
"name": "State",
"value": [
"WA"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45b": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45b",
"name": "State Province",
"value": [
"WA"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c459": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c459",
"name": "Name of business",
"value": [
"MICROSOFT CORPORATION"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45c": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c45c",
"name": "ZIP code",
"value": [
"123"
]
},
"652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c463": {
"id": "652ffbbdc792412ab8e9c463",
"name": "Business registration number",
"value": [
"600413485"
]
}
},
"fileData": {},
"serviceData": [
null,
{
"timestamp": 0,
"serviceStatus": "COMPLETED",
"match": false,
"transactionInfo": {
"accountName": "Workflow Workshops Customer Success-BWS-BWS-FW3-10",
"accountIdentifier": "40d98123-46d4-497f-b505-2cf49e42a0d1",
"countryCode": "US",
"date": "2023-10-18T15:51:15.165688",
"transactionId": "89eea530-1bb8-4a19-84f3-8bbfbeb6ecb1",
"transactionRecordId": "208676d5-2765-d611-de30-a1e652750cbf",
"userName": "Workflow Workshops Customer Success-Service-Worker-1676997664"
},
"watchlistResults": {
"Advanced Business Watchlist": {
"watchlistStatus": "Potential Hit",
"watchlistHitDetails": {
"wlHitsNumber": 0,
"amHitsNumber": 100,
"pepHitsNumber": 0
}
}
},
"secondaryMatch": null
},
{
"timestamp": 0,
"serviceStatus": "COMPLETED",
"match": true,
"transactionInfo": {
"accountName": "Workflow Workshops Customer Success-BI-Business Insights-12",
"accountIdentifier": "5b067223-d76b-4f94-809b-658e9f9e72f6",
"countryCode": "US",
"date": "2023-10-18T15:51:36.85723",
"transactionId": "a464d9ba-3e45-4605-8d37-08d200a57a33",
"transactionRecordId": "20560551-1258-ced6-c41c-cee1a351e8b9",
"userName": "Workflow Workshops Customer Success-Service-Worker-1676997664"
},
"secondaryMatch": null,
"businessStatus": "Active"
}
]
}
},
"status": "PENDING_REVIEW"
}
Under the Authorization tab, click on Generate New Access Token, click Proceed and then click on Use Token. This generates a unique token using the Client Id and Client Secret to authorize this API call. Get the pdf report of the transaction associated with the Transaction Record ID entered in the collection
variable
Path Variables transactionId Retrieved via Retrieve Profile
Under the Authorization tab, click on Generate New Access Token, click Proceed and then click on Use Token. This generates a unique token using the Client Id and Client Secret to authorize this API call. Get transaction details will provide additional details on the service response including datasource granular per field match/nomatch/missing results. Since you have both Business Insights and Business Watchlist Screening in the workflow, you will need to run this call with the Transaction Record ID of both services one by one.
Path Variables transactionRecordID
curl --location 'https://api.trulioo.com/v3/verifications/transactionrecord/:transactionRecordID'
Note: The examples below are for a test entity; the data presented is not based on real information.
{
"TransactionID": "23a29398-631b-4921-a537-a594fae4fd37",
"UploadedDt": "2018-05-29T23:12:58",
"CountryCode": "CA",
"ProductName": "Identity Verification",
"Record": {
"TransactionRecordID": "fd244b13-8cfe-4235-a61a-eadcdd629859",
"RecordStatus": "match",
"DatasourceResults": [
{
"DatasourceName": "Business Insights 433673",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "MonthOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "YearOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "taxidnumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "Suburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvinceCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "DayOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "County",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Data": "BC"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Data": "Acme Inc."
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessStatus",
"Data": "Active"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessType",
"Data": "Corporation"
},
{
"FieldName": "EnhancedProfile",
"Data": "{\"Location\":{\"PrimaryAddress\":[{\"StreetAddressLine\":[{\"LineText\":\"1055 Hastings St W Suite 1200\"}],\"UndeliverableIndicator\":false,\"PrimaryTownName\":\"VANCOUVER\",\"TerritoryAbbreviatedName\":\"BC\",\"PostalCode\":\"V6E 2E9\",\"CountryISOAlpha2Code\":\"CA\",\"TerritoryOfficialName\":\"BRITISH COLUMBIA\",\"PremisesDetail\":[{\"PremisesAreaMeasurement\":7502,\"PremisesAreaMeasurementReliabilityText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":9093,\"$\":\"Estimated\"},\"PremisesAreaMeasurementUnitText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":3848,\"$\":\"Square Feet\"}}],\"CountryGroupName\":\"North America\",\"LatitudeMeasurement\":49.28765,\"LongitudeMeasurement\":-123.118534,\"GeographicalPrecisionText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":30257,\"$\":\"Street Address Centroid\"},\"RegisteredAddressIndicator\":false}]},\"Telecommunication\":{\"TelephoneNumber\":[{\"TelecommunicationNumber\":\"(778) 123-4567\",\"UnreachableIndicator\":false,\"InternationalDialingCode\":\"1\"}],\"WebPageAddress\":[{\"TelecommunicationAddress\":\"www.acme.com\"}]},\"Linkage\":{\"GlobalUltimateOrganization\":{\"PrimaryAddress\":[{\"StreetAddressLine\":[{\"LineText\":\"1055 Hastings St W Suite 1200\"}],\"UndeliverableIndicator\":false,\"PrimaryTownName\":\"VANCOUVER\",\"TerritoryAbbreviatedName\":\"BC\",\"PostalCode\":\"V6E 2E9\",\"CountryISOAlpha2Code\":\"CA\",\"TerritoryOfficialName\":\"BRITISH COLUMBIA\"}],\"DUNSNumber\":\"203111604\",\"OrganizationPrimaryName\":[{\"OrganizationName\":{\"$\":\"Acme Inc\"}}]},\"DomesticUltimateOrganization\":{\"PrimaryAddress\":[{\"StreetAddressLine\":[{\"LineText\":\"1055 Hastings St W Suite 1200\"}],\"UndeliverableIndicator\":false,\"PrimaryTownName\":\"VANCOUVER\",\"TerritoryAbbreviatedName\":\"BC\",\"PostalCode\":\"V6E 2E9\",\"CountryISOAlpha2Code\":\"CA\",\"TerritoryOfficialName\":\"BRITISH COLUMBIA\"}],\"DUNSNumber\":\"203111604\",\"OrganizationPrimaryName\":[{\"OrganizationName\":{\"$\":\"Acme Inc\"}}]},\"LinkageSummary\":{\"GlobalUltimateFamilyTreeLinkageCount\":2},\"FamilyTreeHierarchyLevel\":1},\"RegisteredDetail\":{\"LegalFormDetails\":{\"LegalFormText\":{\"$\":\"Corporation\",\"@DNBCodeValue\":451}},\"IncorporationYear\":\"2010\"},\"PrincipalsAndManagement\":{\"CurrentPrincipal\":[{\"PrincipalName\":{\"FirstName\":\"John\",\"LastName\":\"Doe\",\"FullName\":\"John Doe\",\"@type\":\"fir:IndividualNameType\"},\"JobTitle\":[{\"JobTitleText\":{\"$\":\"Board Member\"}}],\"CurrentManagementResponsibility\":[{\"ManagementResponsibilityText\":{\"$\":\"Board of Directors\",\"@ManagementResponsibilityCode\":\"A1G7\"}}],\"PrincipalIdentificationNumberDetail\":[{\"@DNBCodeValue\":24215,\"@TypeText\":\"Professional Contact Identifier\",\"PrincipalIdentificationNumber\":\"2031116042\"}]},{\"PrincipalName\":{\"FirstName\":\"Jane\",\"LastName\":\"Doe\",\"FullName\":\"Jane Doe\",\"@type\":\"fir:IndividualNameType\"},\"JobTitle\":[{\"JobTitleText\":{\"$\":\"President & Board Member\"}}],\"CurrentManagementResponsibility\":[{\"ManagementResponsibilityText\":{\"$\":\"President\",\"@ManagementResponsibilityCode\":\"A1A6\"}},{\"ManagementResponsibilityText\":{\"$\":\"Board of Directors\",\"@ManagementResponsibilityCode\":\"A1G7\"}}],\"PrincipalIdentificationNumberDetail\":[{\"@DNBCodeValue\":24215,\"@TypeText\":\"Professional Contact Identifier\",\"PrincipalIdentificationNumber\":\"2031116041\"}]}]},\"ActivitiesAndOperations\":{\"LineOfBusinessDetails\":[{\"LineOfBusinessDescription\":{\"$\":\"Miscellaneous personal services, nec, nsk\"}}],\"PrimarySICCategoryValue\":\"I\"},\"SubjectHeader\":{\"OrganizationSummaryText\":\"Miscellaneous personal services, nec, nsk\",\"DUNSNumber\":\"11111604\",\"LastUpdateDate\":{\"$\":\"2020-07-01\"},\"MarketabilityIndicator\":true,\"DUNSSelfRequestIndicator\":false},\"IndustryCode\":{\"IndustryCode\":[{\"IndustryCodeDescription\":[{\"$\":\"Consumer Services\",\"@LanguageCode\":39,\"@IndustryCodeDescriptionLengthCode\":9120}],\"@DNBCodeValue\":25838,\"@TypeText\":\"D&B Hoovers Industry Code\",\"IndustryCode\":{\"$\":\"1208\"},\"DisplaySequence\":1},{\"IndustryCodeDescription\":[{\"$\":\"All Other Personal Services\",\"@LanguageCode\":39,\"@IndustryCodeDescriptionLengthCode\":9120}],\"@DNBCodeValue\":700,\"@TypeText\":\"NAICS\",\"IndustryCode\":{\"$\":\"812990\"},\"DisplaySequence\":1},{\"IndustryCodeDescription\":[{\"$\":\"All Other Personal Services\",\"@LanguageCode\":39,\"@IndustryCodeDescriptionLengthCode\":9120}],\"@DNBCodeValue\":24664,\"@TypeText\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2012\",\"IndustryCode\":{\"$\":\"812990\"},\"DisplaySequence\":1},{\"IndustryCodeDescription\":[{\"$\":\"Other service activities not elsewhere classified\",\"@LanguageCode\":39,\"@IndustryCodeDescriptionLengthCode\":9120}],\"@DNBCodeValue\":21182,\"@TypeText\":\"UK SIC 2003\",\"IndustryCode\":{\"$\":\"93.050\"},\"DisplaySequence\":1},{\"IndustryCodeDescription\":[{\"$\":\"CONSUMER BUYING SVC\",\"@LanguageCode\":39,\"@IndustryCodeDescriptionLengthCode\":2121}],\"@DNBCodeValue\":3599,\"@TypeText\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"IndustryCode\":{\"$\":\"72999904\"},\"DisplaySequence\":1},{\"IndustryCodeDescription\":[{\"$\":\"Misc personal services\",\"@LanguageCode\":39,\"@IndustryCodeDescriptionLengthCode\":1441}],\"@DNBCodeValue\":399,\"@TypeText\":\"US SIC (1987)\",\"IndustryCode\":{\"$\":\"7299\"},\"DisplaySequence\":1}]},\"Financial\":{\"KeyFinancialFiguresOverview\":[{\"StatementHeaderDetails\":{\"FinancialPeriodDuration\":\"P1Y\"},\"SalesRevenueAmount\":[{\"@CurrencyISOAlpha3Code\":\"USD\",\"@ReliabilityText\":\"Modelled\",\"@UnitOfSize\":\"SingleUnits\",\"$\":1791405},{\"@CurrencyISOAlpha3Code\":\"CAD\",\"@ReliabilityText\":\"Modelled\",\"@UnitOfSize\":\"SingleUnits\",\"$\":2368916}]}]},\"OrganizationName\":{\"OrganizationPrimaryName\":[{\"OrganizationName\":{\"$\":\"Acn Inc\"}}]},\"OrganizationDetail\":{\"FamilyTreeMemberRole\":[{\"FamilyTreeMemberRoleText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":12775,\"$\":\"Global Ultimate\"}},{\"FamilyTreeMemberRoleText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":12774,\"$\":\"Domestic Ultimate\"}},{\"FamilyTreeMemberRoleText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":12771,\"$\":\"Headquarters\"}}],\"StandaloneOrganizationIndicator\":false,\"ControlOwnershipDate\":{\"$\":\"2004\"},\"ControlOwnershipTypeText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":0,\"$\":\"Unknown\"},\"BoneyardOrganizationIndicator\":false,\"OperatingStatusText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":9074,\"$\":\"Active\"},\"OrganizationStartYear\":\"2010\"},\"EmployeeFigures\":{\"ConsolidatedEmployeeDetails\":{\"TotalEmployeeQuantity\":15,\"EmployeeCategoryDetails\":[{\"EmployeeBasisText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":9064,\"$\":\"Principals\"}}],\"ReliabilityText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":9093,\"$\":\"Estimated\"}}},\"Assessment\":{\"CommercialCreditScore\":[{\"MarketingRiskClassText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":10925,\"$\":\"Low\"}}]},\"SocioEconomicIdentification\":{\"MinorityOwnedIndicator\":false,\"FemaleOwnedIndicator\":false,\"SmallBusinessIndicator\":false,\"OwnershipEthnicity\":[{\"EthnicityTypeText\":{\"@DNBCodeValue\":0,\"$\":\"Unknown\"}}]}}"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessDetails",
"Data": "{\"resultId\":\"104506\",\"entityName\":\"Acme Inc.\",\"entityNumber\":\"BRN123ABC\",\"normalizedEntityStatus\":\"Active\",\"jurisdiction\":\"BC\",\"formationDate\":\"1990-05-13T00:00:00\",\"normalizedEntityType\":\"Corporation\"}"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Data": "BRN123ABC"
},
{
"FieldName": "DayOfIncorporation",
"Data": "13"
},
{
"FieldName": "MonthOfIncorporation",
"Data": "05"
},
{
"FieldName": "YearOfIncorporation",
"Data": "1990"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "International Watchlist",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistState",
"Data": "Clear"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Business Insights 480052",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "POBox",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "Telephone",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "Suburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "DayOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvinceCode",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "MonthOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "County",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "YearOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "Source",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Data": "Vancouver"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Data": "Acme Inc."
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Data": "V6M 1A3"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessStatus",
"Data": "Active"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessDetails",
"Data": "{\"CompanyName\":\"Acme Inc.\",\"RegistrationNumber\":\"BRN123ABC\",\"CompanyStatus\":\"Active\",\"RegisteredFullAddress\":\"123 Main St, Vancouver, V6M 1A3\",\"RegisteredAddress\":{\"street_address\":\"123 Main St\",\"locality\":\"Vancouver\",\"region\":\"BC\",\"postal_code\":\"V6M 1A3\",\"country\":\"CA\"},\"CountryCode\":\"ca\",\"DayOfIncorporation\":\"13\",\"MonthOfIncorporation\":\"05\",\"YearOfIncorporation\":\"1990\",\"Source\":\"https://www.realsource.com/data.html?corpId=BRN123ABC\",\"AdditionalData\":{\"dissolution_date\":null,\"company_type\":\"Corporation\",\"branch\":null,\"branch_status\":null,\"inactive\":false,\"created_at\":\"2015-12-15T23:28:19+11:00\",\"updated_at\":\"2018-05-02T16:43:43+10:00\",\"retrieved_at\":\"2017-02-25T21:41:28+11:00\",\"source\":{\"publisher\":\"Corporations Canada\",\"url\":\"https://www.realsource.com/data.html?corpId=F154630\",\"retrieved_at\":\"2017-02-25T21:41:28+11:00\"},\"agent_name\":null,\"alternative_names\":[],\"previous_names\":[],\"number_of_employees\":null,\"native_company_number\":null,\"industry_codes\":[],\"identifiers\":[{\"identifier\":{\"uid\":\"859486577RC0001\",\"identifier_system_code\":\"ca_bn\",\"identifier_system_name\":\"Canadian Business Number\"}}],\"trademark_registrations\":[{\"trademark_registration\":{\"mark_details\":{\"mark_text\":\"secretstuff\",\"mark_image_url\":\"https://www.realsource.com/data.html\"},\"register_name\":\"United States Patent and Trademark Office\",\"registration_date\":\"2015-08-25\",\"expiry_date\":null}},{\"trademark_registration\":{\"mark_details\":{\"mark_text\":\"copyrights\",\"mark_image_url\":\"https://www.realsource.com/data.html\"},\"register_name\":\"United States Patent and Trademark Office\",\"registration_date\":\"2015-08-25\",\"expiry_date\":null}},{\"trademark_registration\":{\"mark_details\":{\"mark_text\":\"Brand Name\",\"mark_image_url\":\"https://www.realsource.com/data.html\"},\"register_name\":\"United States Patent and Trademark Office\",\"registration_date\":\"2015-02-24\",\"expiry_date\":null}}],\"corporate_groupings\":[],\"data\":null,\"financial_summary\":null,\"home_company\":null,\"controlling_entity\":null,\"ultimate_beneficial_owners\":[],\"filings\":[],\"officers\":[{\"officer\":{\"id\":19371865,\"name\":\"John Bob\",\"position\":\"director\",\"uid\":null,\"start_date\":null,\"end_date\":null,\"occupation\":null,\"inactive\":false,\"current_status\":null,\"address\":\"123 West 9st\\nVancouver BC V8W 1P0\\nCanada\",\"nationality\":null,\"date_of_birth\":null}},{\"officer\":{\"id\":177852560,\"name\":\"Mary Berry\",\"position\":\"director\",\"uid\":null,\"start_date\":null,\"end_date\":null,\"occupation\":null,\"inactive\":false,\"current_status\":null,\"address\":\"123 - a different avenue\\nLangley BC V8U 3K7\\nCanada\",\"nationality\":null,\"date_of_birth\":null}},{\"officer\":{\"id\":19397462,\"name\":\"David O'Leary\",\"position\":\"director\",\"uid\":null,\"start_date\":null,\"end_date\":null,\"occupation\":null,\"inactive\":false,\"current_status\":null,\"address\":\"#6- The Place\\nSan Francisco CA 68716\\nUnited States\",\"nationality\":null,\"date_of_birth\":null}},{\"officer\":{\"id\":193546563,\"name\":\"Samantha Stafford\",\"position\":\"director\",\"uid\":null,\"start_date\":null,\"end_date\":null,\"occupation\":null,\"inactive\":false,\"current_status\":null,\"address\":\"35 West East Street\\nVancouver BC V0G 8P0\\nCanada\",\"nationality\":null,\"date_of_birth\":null}},{\"officer\":{\"id\":1574146,\"name\":\"Amanda Anaconda\",\"position\":\"director\",\"uid\":null,\"start_date\":null,\"end_date\":null,\"occupation\":null,\"inactive\":false,\"current_status\":null,\"address\":\"41 Up Down Place\\2nd Floor\\nNew York NY 12359\\nUnited States\",\"nationality\":null,\"date_of_birth\":null}}]}}"
},
{
"FieldName": "Source",
"Data": "https://www.realsource.com/data.html"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvince",
"Data": "BC"
},
{
"FieldName": "DayOfIncorporation",
"Data": "13"
},
{
"FieldName": "MonthOfIncorporation",
"Data": "05"
},
{
"FieldName": "YearOfIncorporation",
"Data": "1990"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Data": "123"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Data": "1"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Data": "Main"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Data": "St"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Data": "BRN123ABC"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
}
],
"Errors": [],
"Rule": {
"RuleName": "RuleScript BusinessVerify",
"Note": "Script manually created"
}
},
"Errors": []
}
{
"TransactionID": "cab59115-2885-44b9-bb93-9dc584839349",
"UploadedDt": "2022-08-15T05:20:49",
"CompletedDt": "2022-08-15T05:20:54",
"CountryCode": "CA",
"ProductName": "Identity Verification",
"Record": {
"TransactionRecordID": "202e67ff-28fb-ea9a-d325-d7af3245b0ea",
"RecordStatus": "nomatch",
"DatasourceResults": [
{
"DatasourceName": "Advanced Business Watchlist",
"DatasourceFields": [],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistState",
"Data": "Potential Hit"
},
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistData",
"Data": {
"num_WL_hits": 2,
"num_AM_hits": 2
}
},
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistHitDetails",
"Data": {
"WL_results": [
{
"score": 1.0,
"subjectMatched": "Gringotts Wizarding Bank",
"entityName": "Gringotts Wizarding Bank",
"sourceListType": "FEDERAL - Fine - Breached Sanctions",
"sourceRegion": "United Kingdom",
"remarks": "Posted Date: 12/19/1973 | Letter Issue Date: 07/26/1973 | Subject: Breached Sanction Violation",
"caution": "The Gringotts Bank violated the Ministry of Magic sanctions and lent out a sum of 10,000 galleons to the Death Eaters for their marketing initiative",
"URL": "https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Gringotts_Wizarding_Bank"
},
{
"score": 0.95,
"subjectMatched": "Gringotts Bank",
"entityName": "Gringotts Banks",
"sourceListType": "MOM - Enforcement - Insufficient Security",
"sourceRegion": "United Kingdom",
"remarks": "Issuance Date: 1991-07-31",
"caution": "The Gringotts Bank has been fined 1,000 galleons by the Ministry of Magic for poor compliance and security and allowing the theft of an object of national importance",
"URL": "https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Break-in_of_Gringotts_Wizarding_Bank_(1991)"
}
],
"AM_results": [{
"score": 0.95,
"subjectMatched": "Gringotts Bank",
"text": "Investigations continue into the break-in at Gringotts on 31 July, widely believed to be the work of Dark wizards or witches unknown. Gringotts goblins today insisted that nothing had been taken. The vault that was searched had in fact been emptied the same day. But we're not telling you what was in there, so keep your noses out if you know what's good for you, said a Gringotts spokesgoblin this afternoon",
"URL": "https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Break-in_of_Gringotts_Wizarding_Bank_(1991)"
},
{
"score": 0.90,
"subjectMatched": "Gringotts",
"text": "Gringotts has recently won 2 new awards for compliance and security as the safety place to store objects except for Hogwarts",
"URL": "https://thedailyprophet.net/"
}
]
}
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
}
],
"Errors": [],
"Rule": {
"RuleName": "RuleScript - BusinessVerify_v11",
"Note": "Match on (Business Registration Number OR DUNS)"
}
},
"Errors": []
}
curl --location 'https://api.trulioo.com/v3/verifications/transactionrecord/:transactionRecordID'
{
"InputFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Value": "600413485"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Value": "123"
},
{
"FieldName": "RegistrationDetails",
"Value": "true"
},
{
"FieldName": "ArticleOfAssociation",
"Value": "true"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Value": "MICROSOFT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "RegisterReport",
"Value": "true"
},
{
"FieldName": "AnnualReport",
"Value": "true"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Value": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Value": "Redmond"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumber",
"Value": "91-1144442"
},
{
"FieldName": "EnhancedProfile",
"Value": "true"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvince",
"Value": "WA"
}
],
"TransactionID": "a464d9ba-3e45-4605-8d37-08d200a57a33",
"UploadedDt": "2023-10-18T15:51:13.342777",
"CompletedDt": "2023-10-18T15:51:36.85723",
"CountryCode": "US",
"ProductName": "Identity Verification",
"Record": {
"TransactionRecordID": "20560551-1258-ced6-c41c-cee1a351e8b9",
"RecordStatus": "match",
"DatasourceResults": [
{
"DatasourceName": "BRNValidation",
"DatasourceFields": [],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BRN Name",
"Data": "Washington UBI Number"
},
{
"FieldName": "BRN Country",
"Data": "US"
},
{
"FieldName": "BRN Jurisdiction",
"Data": "Washington"
},
{
"FieldName": "BRN Type",
"Data": "Provincial Business Number"
},
{
"FieldName": "BRN Mask",
"Data": "#########"
},
{
"FieldName": "BRN Length",
"Data": "9"
},
{
"FieldName": "BRN Description",
"Data": "Business ID/Corparate ID issued by Secretary of State (SOS)"
},
{
"FieldName": "UserInputBRNMask",
"Data": "#########"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberName",
"Data": "Washington UBI Number"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberCountry",
"Data": "US"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberJurisdiction",
"Data": "Washington"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberType",
"Data": "Provincial Business Number"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberMask",
"Data": "#########"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberLength",
"Data": "9"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberDescription",
"Data": "Business ID/Corparate ID issued by Secretary of State (SOS)"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberUserInputMask",
"Data": "#########"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumberUserInputMask",
"Data": "#########"
},
{
"FieldName": "ComprehensiveViewMetadata",
"Data": "{\"UsedForComprehensiveView\":false}"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Business Essentials 400497",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "Address1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "DUNSNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "Suburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvinceCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "taxidnumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondAddress1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondCity",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondPostalCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondState",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondSuburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondUnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedLocations",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedLocations\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "ComprehensiveViewMetadata",
"Data": "{\"UsedForComprehensiveView\":true}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedMetadata",
"Data": "{\"Sources\":[\"IRS\"],\"UpdateData\":[{\"Type\":\"CompanyProfileLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"DataRetrievalDate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedRegistrationNumbers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedRegistrationNumbers\":[{\"Number\":\"911144442\",\"Type\":\"7 - TIN and Name combination matches with ITIN Records\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedBusinessNames",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedBusinessName\":[]}"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Business Insights 433673",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "Address1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Status": "nomatch"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "TradestyleName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "DUNSNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "Suburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvinceCode",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "PreviousName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "taxidnumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondAddress1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondCity",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondPostalCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondState",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondSuburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondUnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Data": "MICROSOFT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Data": "600413485"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessReferenceID",
"Data": "6752894315066EDF44D4D97A2BBECBEE"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Data": "Redmond"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Data": "98052-8300"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedLocations",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedLocations\":[{\"LocationType\":\"Registered Address\",\"Address1\":\"1 Microsoft Way\",\"StreetName\":\"Microsoft\",\"StreetType\":\"Way\",\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\",\"CountryCode\":\"US\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "OwnershipCompanyReturned",
"Data": "False"
},
{
"FieldName": "Warning",
"Data": "ArticleOfAssociation not supported. RegistrationDetails not supported. RegisterReport not supported. No Shareholders/UBO found."
},
{
"FieldName": "OriginalBusinessLegalForm",
"Data": "WA PROFIT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIncorporationDetails",
"Data": "{\"JurisdictionOfIncorporation\":\"WA\",\"BusinessLegalForm\":\"WA PROFIT CORPORATION\",\"OriginalBusinessLegalForm\":\"WA PROFIT CORPORATION\",\"DayOfIncorporation\":\"22\",\"MonthOfIncorporation\":\"09\",\"YearOfIncorporation\":\"1993\",\"DerivedBusinessAgeInMonths\":\"366.1\"}"
},
{
"FieldName": "ComprehensiveViewMetadata",
"Data": "{\"UsedForComprehensiveView\":true}"
},
{
"FieldName": "OriginalBusinessStatus",
"Data": "ACTIVE"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessStatus",
"Data": "Active"
},
{
"FieldName": "Address1",
"Data": "1 Microsoft Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Data": "Microsoft"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Data": "Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvince",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "YearOfIncorporation",
"Data": "1993"
},
{
"FieldName": "MonthOfIncorporation",
"Data": "09"
},
{
"FieldName": "DayOfIncorporation",
"Data": "22"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessLegalForm",
"Data": "WA PROFIT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedRegistrationNumbers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedRegistrationNumbers\":[{\"Number\":\"600413485 WA\",\"Type\":\"Business Registration Number\"},{\"Number\":\"INR2EJN1ERAN0W5ZP974\",\"Type\":\"Legal Entity Identifier\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedStockExchanges",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedStockExchanges\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedMetadata",
"Data": "{\"Sources\":[\"Washington Secretary of State\"],\"UpdateData\":[{\"Type\":\"CompanyProfileLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"DirectorsOfficersLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"DataRetrievalDate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"OwnershipLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedBusinessNames",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedBusinessName\":[{\"Name\":\"MICROSOFT CORPORATION\",\"Type\":\"Returned Business Name\",\"UsedForMatching\":true},{\"Name\":\"MICROSOFT CORPORATION\",\"Type\":\"Input Business Name\",\"UsedForMatching\":true}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedDirectorsOfficers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedDirectorsOfficers\":[{\"GivenName\":\"\",\"Surname\":\"\",\"FullName\":\"BENJAMIN O (BEN) ORNDORFF\",\"Position\":\"Officer\",\"Designation\":\"GOVERNOR\",\"Type\":\"Unknown\"},{\"GivenName\":\"\",\"Surname\":\"\",\"FullName\":\"SEE GOVERNORS ON FILE\",\"Position\":\"Officer\",\"Designation\":\"GOVERNOR\",\"Type\":\"Unknown\"},{\"GivenName\":\"\",\"Surname\":\"\",\"FullName\":\"CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY\",\"Position\":\"Agent\",\"Designation\":\"Agent\",\"Type\":\"Unknown\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCompanyOwnershipHierarchy",
"Data": "{\"Ownerships\":[{\"UniqueId\":\"1\",\"FullName\":\"MICROSOFT CORPORATION\",\"BeneficiaryType\":\"Root Business\",\"BusinessEntityType\":\"Business\",\"FullAddress\":[\"1 MICROSOFT WAY REDMOND WA 98052-8300 UNITED STATES\"],\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\",\"CountryCode\":\"US\",\"LegalForm\":\"WA PROFIT CORPORATION\",\"DegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"Status\":\"Active\"}],\"Relationships\":[],\"OwnershipSummary\":{\"TotalOwnershipCount\":0,\"MaximumDegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"TotalAllocatedOwnershipPercentage\":0.0,\"OrganizationsCount\":0,\"IndividualsCount\":0,\"UnknownsCount\":0}}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCommunication",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedCommunication\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedShareCapitals",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedShareCapitals\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIndustries",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedIndustries\":[]}"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Business Insights 480052",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Status": "nomatch"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "TradestyleName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "DUNSNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "Suburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvinceCode",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "taxidnumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondAddress1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondCity",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondPostalCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondState",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondSuburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondUnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Data": "Microsoft Corporation"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Data": "600413485"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "OriginalBusinessLegalForm",
"Data": "Corporation"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Data": "98052-8300"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedLocations",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedLocations\":[{\"LocationType\":\"Primary Address\",\"Address1\":\"1 Microsoft Way,Redmond, WA 98052-8300\",\"BuildingNumber\":\"1\",\"StreetName\":\"Microsoft\",\"StreetType\":\"Way\",\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\"},{\"LocationType\":\"Mailing Address\",\"Address1\":\"PO Box 9163,Farmingdale, NY 11735-9163\",\"City\":\"Farmingdale\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"NY\",\"PostalCode\":\"11735-9163\",\"POBox\":\"PO Box 9163\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "OwnershipCompanyReturned",
"Data": "False"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIncorporationDetails",
"Data": "{\"JurisdictionOfIncorporation\":\"WA\",\"BusinessLegalForm\":\"Corporation\",\"OriginalBusinessLegalForm\":\"Corporation\"}"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondAddress1",
"Data": "1 Microsoft Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingNumber",
"Data": "1"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondPostalCode",
"Data": "98052-8300"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondState",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetName",
"Data": "Microsoft"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetType",
"Data": "Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "ComprehensiveViewMetadata",
"Data": "{\"UsedForComprehensiveView\":true}"
},
{
"FieldName": "DUNSNumber",
"Data": "081466849"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedRegistrationNumbers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedRegistrationNumbers\":[{\"Number\":\"911144442\",\"Type\":\"Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US)\"},{\"Number\":\"60128\",\"Type\":\"Commercial And Government Entity Code\"},{\"Number\":\"91-1144442\",\"Type\":\"Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US)\"},{\"Number\":\"600413485\",\"Type\":\"Business Registration Number (US)\"},{\"Number\":\"FMVPEWNJGLM1\",\"Type\":\"US General Services Administration Unique Entity Identifier\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumber",
"Data": "911144442, Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US); 91-1144442, Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US)"
},
{
"FieldName": "OriginalBusinessStatus",
"Data": "Active"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessStatus",
"Data": "Active"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCommunication",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedCommunication\":[{\"Value\":\"4258828080\",\"Type\":\"Telephone\"},{\"Value\":\"www.microsoft.com\",\"Type\":\"Website\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIndustries",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedIndustries\":[{\"Code\":\"513210\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Software Publishers\"},{\"Code\":\"7371\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Custom computer programming\"},{\"Code\":\"73729902\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Business oriented computer software\"},{\"Code\":\"513210\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Software Publishers\"},{\"Code\":\"513210\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Software Publishers\"},{\"Code\":\"7372\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software services\"},{\"Code\":\"35770000\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Computer peripheral equipment, nec\"},{\"Code\":\"73710301\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Computer software development\"},{\"Code\":\"334118\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Computer Terminal and Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing\"},{\"Code\":\"73729901\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Application computer software\"},{\"Code\":\"73729905\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Operating systems computer software\"},{\"Code\":\"173\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Hoovers Industry Classification\",\"Description\":\"Software\"},{\"Code\":\"7372\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software services\"},{\"Code\":\"7372\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software services\"},{\"Code\":\"73720000\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software\"},{\"Code\":\"513210\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Software Publishers\"},{\"Code\":\"I\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Major Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Services\"},{\"Code\":\"541511\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Custom Computer Programming Services\"},{\"Code\":\"5829\",\"CodeType\":\"NACE Revision 2\",\"Description\":\"Other software publishing\"},{\"Code\":\"7372\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software services\"},{\"Code\":\"3577\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Mfg computer peripheral equipment\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedDirectorsOfficers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedDirectorsOfficers\":[{\"GivenName\":\"BRADFORD\",\"Surname\":\"SMITH\",\"FullName\":\"BRADFORD L SMITH\",\"Position\":\"Vice-Chairman,President\",\"Designation\":\"Vice Chairperson,President\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"AMY\",\"Surname\":\"HOOD\",\"FullName\":\"AMY E HOOD\",\"Position\":\"Executive Vice-President,Chief Financial Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Executive Vice President,Chief Financial Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"CHRISTOPHER\",\"Surname\":\"CAPOSSELA\",\"FullName\":\"CHRISTOPHER C CAPOSSELA\",\"Position\":\"Executive Vice-President,Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Executive Vice President,Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"KATHLEEN\",\"Surname\":\"HOGAN\",\"FullName\":\"KATHLEEN T HOGAN\",\"Position\":\"Executive Vice-President,Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Executive Vice President,Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"ALICE\",\"Surname\":\"JOLLA\",\"FullName\":\"ALICE L JOLLA\",\"Position\":\"Vice-President,Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Vice President,Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"PAVAN\",\"Surname\":\"DAVULURI\",\"FullName\":\"PAVAN DAVULURI\",\"Position\":\"Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"APARNA\",\"Surname\":\"CHENNAPRAGADA\",\"FullName\":\"APARNA CHENNAPRAGADA\",\"Position\":\"Vice-President\",\"Designation\":\"Vice President\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"Satya\",\"Surname\":\"Nadella\",\"FullName\":\"Satya Nadella\",\"Position\":\"Chairman of the Board,Chief Executive Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Chairman of the Board,Chief Executive Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedStockExchanges",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedStockExchanges\":[{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"NASDAQ\",\"Country\":\"US\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Dusseldorf\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Bulgarian\",\"Country\":\"BG\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Munich\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT-RM\",\"Exchange\":\"Moscow\",\"Country\":\"RU\"},{\"Ticker\":\"0QYP\",\"Exchange\":\"London\",\"Country\":\"GB\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"XETRA\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Buenos Aires\",\"Country\":\"AR\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Mexican\",\"Country\":\"MX\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT_KZ\",\"Exchange\":\"KASE (Kazakhstan)\",\"Country\":\"KZ\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF0\",\"Exchange\":\"Frankfurt\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Berlin\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"NEO Exchange\",\"Country\":\"CA\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Lima\",\"Country\":\"PE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT80X\",\"Exchange\":\"Thailand\",\"Country\":\"TH\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT34\",\"Exchange\":\"San Paulo\",\"Country\":\"BR\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Italian\",\"Country\":\"IT\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Stuttgart\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Ukrainian\",\"Country\":\"UA\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Frankfurt\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"04338\",\"Exchange\":\"Hong Kong\",\"Country\":\"HK\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Vienna\",\"Country\":\"AT\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Hannover\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF0\",\"Exchange\":\"Munich\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Euronext Brussels\",\"Country\":\"BE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Hamburg\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Santiago\",\"Country\":\"CL\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedMetadata",
"Data": "{\"Sources\":[\"Dun & Bradstreet\"],\"UpdateData\":[{\"Type\":\"CompanyProfileLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"29\",\"Month\":\"8\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"DirectorsOfficersLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"29\",\"Month\":\"8\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedBusinessNames",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedBusinessName\":[{\"Name\":\"MICROSOFT CORPORATION\",\"Type\":\"Input Business Name\",\"UsedForMatching\":true},{\"Name\":\"Microsoft Corporation\",\"Type\":\"Returned Business Name\",\"UsedForMatching\":true}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Data": "1"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Data": "Microsoft"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Data": "Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvince",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedShareCapitals",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedShareCapitals\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCompanyOwnershipHierarchy",
"Data": "{\"Ownerships\":[{\"UniqueId\":\"1\",\"FullName\":\"Microsoft Corporation\",\"BeneficiaryType\":\"Root Business\",\"BusinessEntityType\":\"Business\",\"FullAddress\":[\"1 Microsoft Way\"],\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\",\"CountryCode\":\"US\",\"LegalForm\":\"Corporation\",\"DegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"Status\":\"Active\"}],\"Relationships\":[],\"OwnershipSummary\":{\"TotalOwnershipCount\":0,\"MaximumDegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"TotalAllocatedOwnershipPercentage\":0.0,\"OrganizationsCount\":0,\"IndividualsCount\":0,\"UnknownsCount\":0}}"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessLegalForm",
"Data": "Corporation"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Business Insights 653985",
"DatasourceFields": [],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedLocations",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedLocations\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIncorporationDetails",
"Data": "{}"
},
{
"FieldName": "ComprehensiveViewMetadata",
"Data": "{\"UsedForComprehensiveView\":false}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedRegistrationNumbers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedRegistrationNumbers\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCommunication",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedCommunication\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedShareCapitals",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedShareCapitals\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIndustries",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedIndustries\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedStockExchanges",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedStockExchanges\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedDirectorsOfficers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedDirectorsOfficers\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCompanyOwnershipHierarchy",
"Data": "{\"Ownerships\":[],\"Relationships\":[],\"OwnershipSummary\":{\"TotalOwnershipCount\":0,\"MaximumDegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"TotalAllocatedOwnershipPercentage\":0.0,\"OrganizationsCount\":0,\"IndividualsCount\":0,\"UnknownsCount\":0}}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedMetadata",
"Data": "{\"Sources\":[],\"UpdateData\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedBusinessNames",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedBusinessName\":[]}"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Comprehensive View",
"DatasourceFields": [
{
"FieldName": "Address1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Status": "nomatch"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "UnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "TradestyleName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "DUNSNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "Suburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvinceCode",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "BuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Status": "match"
},
{
"FieldName": "PreviousName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "taxidnumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondAddress1",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingNumber",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondCity",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondPostalCode",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondState",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetName",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetType",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondSuburb",
"Status": "missing"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondUnitNumber",
"Status": "missing"
}
],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Data": "MICROSOFT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessRegistrationNumber",
"Data": "600413485"
},
{
"FieldName": "JurisdictionOfIncorporation",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessReferenceID",
"Data": "6752894315066EDF44D4D97A2BBECBEE"
},
{
"FieldName": "City",
"Data": "Redmond"
},
{
"FieldName": "PostalCode",
"Data": "98052-8300"
},
{
"FieldName": "OwnershipCompanyReturned",
"Data": "False"
},
{
"FieldName": "OriginalBusinessLegalForm",
"Data": "WA PROFIT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIncorporationDetails",
"Data": "{\"JurisdictionOfIncorporation\":\"WA\",\"BusinessLegalForm\":\"WA PROFIT CORPORATION\",\"OriginalBusinessLegalForm\":\"WA PROFIT CORPORATION\",\"DayOfIncorporation\":\"22\",\"MonthOfIncorporation\":\"09\",\"YearOfIncorporation\":\"1993\",\"DerivedBusinessAgeInMonths\":\"366.1\"}"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondAddress1",
"Data": "1 Microsoft Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondBuildingNumber",
"Data": "1"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondPostalCode",
"Data": "98052-8300"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondState",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetName",
"Data": "Microsoft"
},
{
"FieldName": "SecondStreetType",
"Data": "Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedLocations",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedLocations\":[{\"LocationType\":\"Registered Address\",\"Address1\":\"1 Microsoft Way\",\"StreetName\":\"Microsoft\",\"StreetType\":\"Way\",\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\",\"CountryCode\":\"US\"},{\"LocationType\":\"Primary Address\",\"Address1\":\"1 Microsoft Way,Redmond, WA 98052-8300\",\"BuildingNumber\":\"1\",\"StreetName\":\"Microsoft\",\"StreetType\":\"Way\",\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\"},{\"LocationType\":\"Mailing Address\",\"Address1\":\"PO Box 9163,Farmingdale, NY 11735-9163\",\"City\":\"Farmingdale\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"NY\",\"PostalCode\":\"11735-9163\",\"POBox\":\"PO Box 9163\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "OriginalBusinessStatus",
"Data": "ACTIVE"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessStatus",
"Data": "Active"
},
{
"FieldName": "Address1",
"Data": "1 Microsoft Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetName",
"Data": "Microsoft"
},
{
"FieldName": "StreetType",
"Data": "Way"
},
{
"FieldName": "StateProvince",
"Data": "WA"
},
{
"FieldName": "YearOfIncorporation",
"Data": "1993"
},
{
"FieldName": "MonthOfIncorporation",
"Data": "09"
},
{
"FieldName": "DayOfIncorporation",
"Data": "22"
},
{
"FieldName": "BusinessLegalForm",
"Data": "WA PROFIT CORPORATION"
},
{
"FieldName": "TaxIDNumber",
"Data": "911144442, Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US); 91-1144442, Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US)"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCommunication",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedCommunication\":[{\"Value\":\"4258828080\",\"Type\":\"Telephone\"},{\"Value\":\"www.microsoft.com\",\"Type\":\"Website\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedIndustries",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedIndustries\":[{\"Code\":\"513210\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Software Publishers\"},{\"Code\":\"7371\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Custom computer programming\"},{\"Code\":\"73729902\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Business oriented computer software\"},{\"Code\":\"7372\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software services\"},{\"Code\":\"35770000\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Computer peripheral equipment, nec\"},{\"Code\":\"73710301\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Computer software development\"},{\"Code\":\"334118\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Computer Terminal and Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing\"},{\"Code\":\"73729901\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Application computer software\"},{\"Code\":\"73729905\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Operating systems computer software\"},{\"Code\":\"173\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Hoovers Industry Classification\",\"Description\":\"Software\"},{\"Code\":\"73720000\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Prepackaged software\"},{\"Code\":\"I\",\"CodeType\":\"D&B Standard Major Industry Code\",\"Description\":\"Services\"},{\"Code\":\"541511\",\"CodeType\":\"North American Industry Classification System 2022\",\"Description\":\"Custom Computer Programming Services\"},{\"Code\":\"5829\",\"CodeType\":\"NACE Revision 2\",\"Description\":\"Other software publishing\"},{\"Code\":\"3577\",\"CodeType\":\"US Standard Industry Code 1987 - 4 digit\",\"Description\":\"Mfg computer peripheral equipment\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedDirectorsOfficers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedDirectorsOfficers\":[{\"GivenName\":\"\",\"Surname\":\"\",\"FullName\":\"BENJAMIN O (BEN) ORNDORFF\",\"Position\":\"Officer\",\"Designation\":\"GOVERNOR\",\"Type\":\"Unknown\"},{\"GivenName\":\"\",\"Surname\":\"\",\"FullName\":\"SEE GOVERNORS ON FILE\",\"Position\":\"Officer\",\"Designation\":\"GOVERNOR\",\"Type\":\"Unknown\"},{\"GivenName\":\"\",\"Surname\":\"\",\"FullName\":\"CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY\",\"Position\":\"Agent\",\"Designation\":\"Agent\",\"Type\":\"Unknown\"},{\"GivenName\":\"BRADFORD\",\"Surname\":\"SMITH\",\"FullName\":\"BRADFORD L SMITH\",\"Position\":\"Vice-Chairman,President\",\"Designation\":\"Vice Chairperson,President\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"AMY\",\"Surname\":\"HOOD\",\"FullName\":\"AMY E HOOD\",\"Position\":\"Executive Vice-President,Chief Financial Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Executive Vice President,Chief Financial Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"CHRISTOPHER\",\"Surname\":\"CAPOSSELA\",\"FullName\":\"CHRISTOPHER C CAPOSSELA\",\"Position\":\"Executive Vice-President,Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Executive Vice President,Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"KATHLEEN\",\"Surname\":\"HOGAN\",\"FullName\":\"KATHLEEN T HOGAN\",\"Position\":\"Executive Vice-President,Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Executive Vice President,Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"ALICE\",\"Surname\":\"JOLLA\",\"FullName\":\"ALICE L JOLLA\",\"Position\":\"Vice-President,Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Vice President,Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"PAVAN\",\"Surname\":\"DAVULURI\",\"FullName\":\"PAVAN DAVULURI\",\"Position\":\"Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"APARNA\",\"Surname\":\"CHENNAPRAGADA\",\"FullName\":\"APARNA CHENNAPRAGADA\",\"Position\":\"Vice-President\",\"Designation\":\"Vice President\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"},{\"GivenName\":\"Satya\",\"Surname\":\"Nadella\",\"FullName\":\"Satya Nadella\",\"Position\":\"Chairman of the Board,Chief Executive Officer\",\"Designation\":\"Chairman of the Board,Chief Executive Officer\",\"Type\":\"Individual\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedStockExchanges",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedStockExchanges\":[{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"NASDAQ\",\"Country\":\"US\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Dusseldorf\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Bulgarian\",\"Country\":\"BG\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Munich\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT-RM\",\"Exchange\":\"Moscow\",\"Country\":\"RU\"},{\"Ticker\":\"0QYP\",\"Exchange\":\"London\",\"Country\":\"GB\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"XETRA\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Buenos Aires\",\"Country\":\"AR\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Mexican\",\"Country\":\"MX\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT_KZ\",\"Exchange\":\"KASE (Kazakhstan)\",\"Country\":\"KZ\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF0\",\"Exchange\":\"Frankfurt\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Berlin\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"NEO Exchange\",\"Country\":\"CA\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Lima\",\"Country\":\"PE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT80X\",\"Exchange\":\"Thailand\",\"Country\":\"TH\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT34\",\"Exchange\":\"San Paulo\",\"Country\":\"BR\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Italian\",\"Country\":\"IT\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Stuttgart\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Ukrainian\",\"Country\":\"UA\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Frankfurt\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"04338\",\"Exchange\":\"Hong Kong\",\"Country\":\"HK\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Vienna\",\"Country\":\"AT\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Hannover\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF0\",\"Exchange\":\"Munich\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Euronext Brussels\",\"Country\":\"BE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSF\",\"Exchange\":\"Hamburg\",\"Country\":\"DE\"},{\"Ticker\":\"MSFT\",\"Exchange\":\"Santiago\",\"Country\":\"CL\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedShareCapitals",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedShareCapitals\":[]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedMetadata",
"Data": "{\"Sources\":[\"Washington Secretary of State\",\"Dun & Bradstreet\",\"IRS\"],\"UpdateData\":[{\"Type\":\"CompanyProfileLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"29\",\"Month\":\"8\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"DirectorsOfficersLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"29\",\"Month\":\"8\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"DataRetrievalDate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}},{\"Type\":\"OwnershipLastUpdate\",\"Date\":{\"Day\":\"18\",\"Month\":\"10\",\"Year\":\"2023\"}}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedRegistrationNumbers",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedRegistrationNumbers\":[{\"Number\":\"600413485 WA\",\"Type\":\"Business Registration Number\"},{\"Number\":\"INR2EJN1ERAN0W5ZP974\",\"Type\":\"Legal Entity Identifier\"},{\"Number\":\"911144442\",\"Type\":\"Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US)\"},{\"Number\":\"60128\",\"Type\":\"Commercial And Government Entity Code\"},{\"Number\":\"91-1144442\",\"Type\":\"Federal Taxpayer Identification Number (US)\"},{\"Number\":\"600413485\",\"Type\":\"Business Registration Number (US)\"},{\"Number\":\"FMVPEWNJGLM1\",\"Type\":\"US General Services Administration Unique Entity Identifier\"}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedBusinessNames",
"Data": "{\"StandardizedBusinessName\":[{\"Name\":\"MICROSOFT CORPORATION\",\"Type\":\"Returned Business Name\",\"UsedForMatching\":true},{\"Name\":\"MICROSOFT CORPORATION\",\"Type\":\"Input Business Name\",\"UsedForMatching\":true}]}"
},
{
"FieldName": "DUNSNumber",
"Data": "081466849"
},
{
"FieldName": "StandardizedCompanyOwnershipHierarchy",
"Data": "{\"Ownerships\":[{\"UniqueId\":\"1\",\"FullName\":\"Microsoft Corporation\",\"BeneficiaryType\":\"Root Business\",\"BusinessEntityType\":\"Business\",\"FullAddress\":[\"1 Microsoft Way\"],\"City\":\"Redmond\",\"StateProvinceCode\":\"WA\",\"PostalCode\":\"98052-8300\",\"CountryCode\":\"US\",\"LegalForm\":\"Corporation\",\"DegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"Status\":\"Active\"}],\"Relationships\":[],\"OwnershipSummary\":{\"TotalOwnershipCount\":0,\"MaximumDegreeOfSeparation\":0,\"TotalAllocatedOwnershipPercentage\":0.0,\"OrganizationsCount\":0,\"IndividualsCount\":0,\"UnknownsCount\":0}}"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
},
{
"DatasourceName": "Language Intelligence",
"DatasourceFields": [],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "ComprehensiveViewMetadata",
"Data": "{\"UsedForComprehensiveView\":false}"
}
],
"Errors": [],
"FieldGroups": []
}
],
"Errors": [],
"Rule": {
"RuleName": "RuleScript - BusinessVerify_v114",
"Note": "1 Records Match(BusinessName)"
}
},
"Errors": []
}
{
"InputFields": [
{
"FieldName": "BusinessName",
"Value": "MICROSOFT CORPORATION"
}
],
"TransactionID": "89eea530-1bb8-4a19-84f3-8bbfbeb6ecb1",
"UploadedDt": "2023-10-18T15:51:12.516705",
"CompletedDt": "2023-10-18T15:51:15.165688",
"CountryCode": "US",
"ProductName": "Identity Verification",
"Record": {
"TransactionRecordID": "208676d5-2765-d611-de30-a1e652750cbf",
"RecordStatus": "nomatch",
"DatasourceResults": [
{
"DatasourceName": "Advanced Business Watchlist",
"DatasourceFields": [],
"AppendedFields": [
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistState",
"Data": "Potential Hit"
},
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistData",
"Data": {
"num_WL_hits": 0,
"num_AM_hits": 100
}
},
{
"FieldName": "WatchlistHitDetails",
"Data": {
"WL_results": [],
"AM_results": [
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Publish Date December 9, 2020 Phishing campaign spoofs Microsoft domain. Is lack of DMARC enforcement to blame? Bradley Barth Follow @bbb1216bbb Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Print Share by Email Building 92 at Microsoft Corporation headquarters in Redmond, Washington. (Coolcaesar, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons) An email security company says its researchers observed a spear phishing campaign that exactly spoofed a Microsoft email domain to trick Office 365 users. This suggests Microsoft’s servers were not enforcing protective DMARC authentication protocols when communications were received – and perhaps still are not. The campaign, according to a blog post published by the company Ironscales, uses a lure that suggests the recipient has important email messages that have been quarantined, and must click a link to salvage them. The phishing email reportedly alludes to a hosted email security feature that Microsoft introduced last September as a way to salvage emails that are wrongly labeled as spam, or phishes by the company’s Exchange Online Protection filtering service. Authored by Vice President of Research & Developer Lomy Ovadia, the blog post said that nearly 100 of Ironscales’ customers across multiple industries – including financial services, health care, insurance, manufacturing, utilities, and telecommunications – have received this phishing email, which appears to come from the sender domain address [email protected] According to the report, the emails were able to pass secure email gateways due to a lack of DMARC, otherwise known as Domain Message Authentication Reporting. “Our research found that Microsoft servers are not currently enforcing the DMARC protocol, meaning these exact domain spoofing messages are not being rejected by gateway controls, such as Office 365 EOP and ATP,†Ovadia wrote. “Any other email service that respects and enforces DMARC would have blocked such emails. It remains unknown as to why Microsoft is allowing a spoof of their very own domain against their own email infrastructure.” DMARC works by authenticating an email sender’s identity using DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) and Sender Policy Framework (SPF) standards. DMARC users also set a policy for whether emails that don’t pass validation should be rejected, quarantined or allowed by the email servers that receive them. Asked to comment on Ironscales’ findings and scathing assessment, Microsoft asserted that it does leverage DMARC and other protections. “Contrary to claims in the third-party report, Office 365 has rich in-built controls to block domain spoofing emails and enforces DMARC checks. We encourage all customers to make sure they have deployed the latest security controls in Office 365, enabled multifactor authentication for Office 365 and train[ed] their end users to observe caution when clicking on links from unknown senders,†said a Microsoft spokesperson. Microsoft also said that DMARC checks actually “happened in this instance,†and that, in addition, the company has gone beyond by “leveraging our unique cloud-base[d] spoof intelligence that enables domain spoofing protection to domains that have not enforced DMARC.†Moreover, the company said that Office 365 and Microsoft Defender for Office 365 “employs a multi-layered filtering engine that looks at multiple aspects of an email using AI to block malicious mails from reaching end users and constantly learn from latest attack vectors.†Valimail, an email security firm that, together with Microsoft, offers a comprehensive email solution for Microsoft 365 customers, designed to stop content-based phishing attacks, defended Microsoft. “The Ironscales report is not correct,” said Seth Blank, vice president of standards and new technologies at Valimail. “Microsoft does enforce DMARC policies on inbound mail, for domains which have it configured. However, for domains with a DMARC ‘reject’ policy (like Microsoft.com), Microsoft doesn’t reject messages entirely, as most mail receivers do: Instead, it treats messages that fail authentication as spam, and puts the messages in the recipients’ ‘Junk’ folder, or optionally in quarantine that an account admin can review, depending on the organization’s Microsoft 365 security settings. In other words, messages that fail DMARC won’t be spotted in an M365 inbox, but they can still be retrieved — for instance, when a user is in their ‘Junk’ folder.” Ironscales has held firm. A spokesman responded to Microsoft’s comments with the following reply: “Whether or not Microsoft users have deployed the latest security controls, enabled multi-factor authentication or trained their users to be phishing aware is irrelevant as to why this email spoofing attack bypassed technical controls using specifically the Microsoft.com domain. Microsoft is on the record as having partnered with Agari for DMARC enforcement, making the protocol a default setting that doesn’t require manual configuration. Unfortunately, our research, which we stand by completely, proves that the combined Microsoft and Agari solution is not blocking spoofed emails, although they claim this is the default.†IRONSCALES further countered that the phishing emails in questions landed in inboxes and not the junk folders as Vailmail stated. Security awareness training programs teach employees to look at an incoming email’s sender address to ensure that it is authentic. But if a phishing email perfectly mimics a company’s legitimate domain, then that is one less clue that recipients have to determine that they are being scammed. “You have 3 quarantined messages in your quantine [sic] portal as of 12/2/2020. You can choose what happens to them,†said a sample phishing email purporting to come from Microsoft, Ironscales reported. The link included in the email supposedly leads to a portal, but actually leads to a phishing page that captures victims’ O365 login credentials, which if stolen could potentially be sold on the dark web. In his blog post, Ovadia recommended that companies configure their defenses for DMARC, and also implemented “advanced mailbox-level email security that continuously studies every employee’s inbox to detect anomalies based on both email data and metadata extracted from previously trusted communications.†Joseph Neumann, director of offensive security at Coalfire, told SC Media that companies like Microsoft “are prioritizing protecting incoming mail and are less focused on protecting external. Additionally, Microsoft and other CSPs [communications service providers] that provide this service also have other mitigations in place that they feel reduce the dependence on DMARC. For example, not accepting external emails from domains it controls email for. However, this doesn’t stop rogue entities from using the lack of DMARC to phish organizations’ customers and entities.†Ray Kelly, principal security engineer at WhiteHat Security, also noted that DMARC can be “incredibly difficult†for large organizations to maintain, and that even in cases where DMARC is in place, it can sometimes result in legitimate emails getting blocked from inboxes, which is also problematic. “Companies such Microsoft, with a vast amount of domains and constant network changes, can easily break email for an enormous amount of users when using DMARC,†said Kelly. “Many companies that utilize DMARC have their policy set to ‘none’ [which allows potentially fradulent emails to still be sent] rather than ‘reject’ in fear that it will stop legitimate emails from being delivered.†Topics: Cybercrime Email Security Phishing Suspicious email aimed to get users to give up Office 365 credentials ",
"URL": "https://www.scmagazine.com/home/security-news/phishing/phishing-campaign-spoofs-microsoft-domain-is-lack-of-dmarc-enforcement-to-blame/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Cruise, the autonomous vehicle subsidiary of the Detroit giant, was the first company to get a green light for a robotaxi service in California.General Motors (GM) - Get General Motors Company Report had taken a lead in the race to develop the technologies that would make a car completely self-driving. Its subsidiary Cruise in fact obtained authorization from the Californian authorities on June 2 to operate robotaxis in San Francisco. Basically, self-driving vehicles that can carry people to and from wherever they want to go in the city from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. and only when there’s no \"heavy rain, heavy fog, heavy smoke, hail, sleet, or snow.”The rides are limited to \"select streets in San Francisco,” the California Public Utilities Commission said last June. The cars involved can only drive at a maximum speed of 30 mph.This decision was a first in California and in particular in San Francisco where the inhabitants have been accustomed for a few years to seeing different companies from Cruise to Waymo (Alphabet (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Report) circulating self-driving vehicles equipped with cameras and sensors.None of these firms, however, had been authorized to charge potential customers and circulate their vehicles on the streets of the city without a human being ready to take the wheel in the event of a problem.Cruise's Robotaxi Involved in CrashBy getting the green light from the authorities for even a limited robotaxi service, Cruise had thus won a huge victory, giving GM and its partners - Walmart (WMT) - Get Walmart Inc. Report and Honda (HMC) - Get Honda Motor Company Ltd. Report - a strong argument to brag about their technological advances against the competition. GM is Cruise's majority shareholder. But the legacy carmaker also has partners like Honda, Walmart and Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report in this adventure.But the day after the authorization was granted, an autonomous vehicle (AV) from Cruise found itself in a collision due to a defect which subsequently forced the startup to recall vehicles in order to resolve the problem.Cruise \"is recalling certain automated driving systems (ADS),\" the company said in recent documents filed with the National High Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). \"The software may, in certain circumstances when making an unprotected left, cause the ADS to incorrectly predict another vehicle's path or be insufficiently reactive to the sudden path change of a road user.\"An incident related to this defect has been identified. It happened on June 3 and involved \"an oncoming vehicle traveling well above the speed limit in a restricted right-turn/bus-only lane.\"As the Cruise AV turned left and began traversing the intersection, the car \"predicted that the oncoming vehicle, which was traveling approximately 40 mph in the 25 mph right-turn lane, would turn right and directly into the path of the Cruise AV. After the Cruise AV braked to avoid colliding with the front end of the oncoming vehicle, the oncoming vehicle suddenly moved out of the right-turn lane and proceeded straight through the intersection colliding with the rear right quarter panel of the Cruise AV,\" the company said.It added that the ADS had to decide between two different risk scenarios and chose the one with the least potential for a serious collision at the time, before the oncoming vehicle’s sudden change of direction. Software UpdateAbout 80 Cruise vehicles were affected out of 100. The firm said it has voluntarily recalled the vehicles to update the software. The repairs were carried out in July.\"Cruise has determined this scenario would not recur after a software update installed on all affected vehicles on July 6, 2022,\" the company said. \"Cruise released a new software update that, among other things, improves the ADS’s predictive performance in various ways, including conditions similar to the singular, exceptional event that is the subject of this filing. Cruise has determined that the ADS would have selected a different path that averted the collision.\"However, the company would like to point out that it conducted an investigation including the police report on the incident. Its findings show that the other car was at fault.\"The police report found, among other things, the 'party at most fault' for the collision was the other vehicle, which was 'traveling in the ... right turn only lane at a speed that was greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for the safety of others on the roadway.'\"TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article265351711.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "The founder of the e-commerce giant Amazon had lost an honorary title in recent weeks.The humiliation did not last long. The earthquake that occurred in the hushed environment of the largest fortunes on the planet in mid-September seems to have completely disappeared. It does not seem to have left any traces and even appears as a distant memory.Everything even seems to be back to normal, that you even wonder if there was even a tremor. Jeff Bezos, the former richest man in the world, on Sept. 16 lost his title as the second richest man in the world to Indian businessman Gautam Adani.The information has gone around the world as Americans, and more particularly the titans of tech, have dominated the rankings of the world's big fortunes for several years. The duo formed by Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, and Bezos at the top of these rankings has become a form of routine for those who love them.Bezos Is Back on TopThe founder and executive chairman of tech and online-retail giant Amazon (AMZN) - Get Amazon.com Inc. Report on Sept. 16 had dropped to No. 3, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. That day, Bezos had a fortune estimated at slightly below $147 billion, compared to $147 billion for the Indian tycoon Gautam Adani, the Indian billionaire and chairman of Adani Group, an industrial conglomerate. Two weeks later, Bezos regained his second place. He is worth $136 billion as of Sept. 30, according to Bloomberg Billionaires Index. He is preceded by Musk, the CEO of Tesla (TSLA) - Get Tesla Inc. Report, whose fortune is estimated at $236 billion. Adani fell to fourth place with a fortune of $130 billion. Bernard Arnault, the CEO of the French luxury group LVMH (LVMHF) , returned to third place with a fortune estimated at $131 billion.The fifth richest man in the world is Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report, who is worth $105 billion.If Bezos regained his title, the billionaire remains the person who has lost the most money among the members of the Top 10 since January. His fortune has indeed decreased by $56.5 billion in nine months.Adani Is Only Rising BillionaireArnault lost $47.4 billion during that time, while Gates' fortune is down $32.8 billion and Musk's is down $32.2 billion. Most of the wealth of these billionaires is based on the stakes they have in their respective companies. The shocks that the financial markets have been undergoing for several months are thus the cause of the decline in the fortunes of the richest.Adani, on the other hand, is the only billionaire in the Top 10 to have seen his fortune increase since January. He is now worth $53.6 billion dollars more than at the start of 2022.At the beginning of the year, Adani became the richest person in Asia, ahead of his countryman Mukesh Ambani. Ambani ranked 10th richest person in the world with an estimated fortune of $82.7 billion.The rise of Adani began during the covid-19 pandemic. In March 2020, his net wealth was valued over $6 billion. Since then, his fortune has increased by a factor of almost 25. Adani, 60, is not well-known in the West. Born in 1962 in Ahmedabad in western India, Adani comes from a modest family of seven children whose father was a small textile merchant. A self-made executive, Adani started working at age 16 at the diamond dealer Mahendra Brothers, where he was responsible for sorting precious stones.In 1988, he founded a commodity trading firm that would become the Adani conglomerate. Zuckerberg Continues to DeclineAdani has grown the group by acquiring companies with debt. Adani group has become the most valuable company in India. The company holds mines, ports and power plants. It owns a dozen commercial ports and is present in coal, electricity and renewable energy. It also has diversified into airports, data centers and defense.The Top 10 richest people in the world is dominated by tech tycoons. The co-founders of Alphabet (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Report, the parent company of Google, Larry Page and Sergey Brin are respectively the seventh and eighth richest people in the world with fortunes estimated at $88.7 billion and $84.9 billion respectively. Iconic investor Warren Buffett is sixth with a net worth of $94.2 billion, while Steve Ballmer is ninth with a net worth of $83.3 billion.Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of social networking giant Meta Platforms (META) - Get Meta Platforms Inc. Report, has been ejected from the frontrunners and is only 23rd richest on the planet. He is currently worth $50.9 billion after losing $74.6 billion since January.The collapse of Zuckerberg's fortune coincides with the stock market crash of Meta, which faces tough competition from TikTok, and Apple's decision to give iPhone owners the choice to decide which apps can track their movements online.Action Alerts PlusThe Best Ideas For You To Build WealthA members-only investing club that helps you grow your portfolio with real-time trade alerts, analysis of major market events, and key opportunities.Real-Time Trade Alerts24/7 Access To The PortfolioPortfolio Price TargetsLearn moreTheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article266711306.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "The Tatoosh went up for sale a few months ago.It is taking a few years to sell off Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report co-founder Paul Allen's collection of real estate and luxury yachts -- after the business and tech magnate died in 2018 at the age of 65, an estate chaired by his sister has been organizing an ongoing sell-off.In August, the estate sold eight homes in Washington's Mercer Island for a combined $67.1 million. And while it is not exactly a home, much less eight, Allen's \"Octopus\" superyacht sold to Swedish pharmaceuticals billionaire Roger Samuelsson after originally being listed for $325 million. Even though the final sales price was not disclosed, the estate had earlier lowered the asking price to $278 million.The 414-foot Octopus was not Allen's only superyacht. At around the same time, Allen's estate also listed the 303-foot-long Tatoosh for $90 million.A $90 Million Yacht PurchaseThis yacht was on the market for longer but eventually sold to an undisclosed buyer this week. Stuart Larsen, a yacht broker with Fort Lauderdale's Fraser Yachts, represented the sale.\"Tatoosh\" is a Chinook word for breast and is also the name of a wilderness area in a Washington state park -- it is not entirely clear why Allen chose to give it that name in particular. Allen bought the yacht from telecommunications magnate Craig McCaw in 2001 for $100 million; McCaw, in turn, had it custom-built by German ship company Nobiskrug.\"Custom-built by German shipyard Nobiskrug, the 92.4M/303'02\" TATOOSH was one of the finest superyachts available on the market today,\" Fraser Yachts wrote in a blog post announcing the purchase.Tatoosh underwent a remodeling in 2001 meant to make it look more modern. At the time of purchase, it came with two helicopter pads, large tenders, swimming pool, beach club, elevator, and cinema as just some of the onboard amenities.Fittingly of the \"superyacht\" title, the Tatoosh also comes with 11 staterooms that would each fit up to 19 guests. It is also the 60th largest yacht in the world, behind ones like the 162.5-meter eclipse owned by Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich.Too Many Yachts, Too Little TimeAllen's sister Jody Allen has been the executor in charge of the estate and has been on a mission to whittle it down as per her late brother's instructions. One of the estate's biggest assets is the Seattle Seahawks football team -- although Jody Allen has repeatedly said that they are not planning to sell it for the time being.Even before his death, Allen had said that his yachts had started to weigh on him. \"They’re too big, and there are too many of them,\" Allen said of them at a 2011 presentation in Seattle's Town Hall.While superyachts are often criticized for their role in ostentatious displays of wealth, they recently became the subject of much attention after government officials stepped up efforts to seize ones belonging to Russian oligarchs as part of the sanctions placed amid the country's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.In May, the government of Fiji seized the 348-foot Amadea yacht belonging to Suleiman Kerimov -- the oligarch worth over $14 billion had already been under sanctions from the U.S. Treasury Department since 2018 over alleged money laundering but was subject to new ones due to his close ties to President Vladimir Putin amid the invasion.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article268340032.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "The rout in financial markets since January has claimed a big casualty: tech billionaires.The market rout is a personal disaster for many investorsApart from the defensive sectors and energy, the rest of the economy is impacted by the uncertainties surrounding growth.The aggressive increase in interest rates by the Federal Reserve to crush inflation, which is at its highest in 40 years, has raised fears of a sharp slowdown in economic activity. These fears are a bad blow for growth assets like tech groups that are bets on the future.Unsurprisingly, tech groups have been struggling for several months. The same tech companies didn't help matters by issuing dire warnings about the economic situation.\"We are being a bit more responsible through one of the toughest macroeconomic conditions underway in the past decade, I think it’s important that as a company, we pull together to get through moments like this,\" Sundar Pichai, chief executive officer of Alphabet (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Report told employees last month.Big Tech WreckedGoogle's parent company is in austerity mode: the company has canceled the next version of its Pixelbook laptop and dissolved the team responsible for building it. It has also made cuts at its Area 120 tech incubator whose goal was to keep some of the company’s talent in-house. The Mountain View, Calif.-based firm has also cut several perks, travel and entertainment budgets.\"For the first 18 years of the company, we basically grew quickly basically every year, and then more recently our revenue has been flat to slightly down for the first time,\" Meta Platforms' (META) - Get Meta Platforms Inc. Report CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees on Sept. 30.He added that the company, which employed 83,553 people as of June 30, up 32% from 63,404 as of June 30, 2021, will be \"somewhat smaller\" by the end of 2023.These various cost reduction measures seem to mark the end of a glorious era for Silicon Valley, which in recent years has become the favorite destination for talent. After having been one of the great beneficiaries of the covid-19 pandemic, tech is today one of the biggest victims of the downturn in growth.There is also another way to look at the disaster caused to the sector by the current economic uncertainty: the fortunes of tech billionaires.Musk, Bezos, Gates, Zuck All in the RedIn the Bloomberg Billionaires Index's top 25 fortunes, there are nine U.S. tech billionaires, six of whom are in the top 10. As of Oct. 15, these nine billionaires have together lost $386 billion in personal wealth since January.Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of social media giant Meta Platforms, is the one whose fortunes have shrunk the most. It has lost $77.7 billion since January. Next comes the richest an in the world. Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla (TSLA) - Get Tesla Inc. Report, the world's largest fortune, lost $72.5 billion. Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon (AMZN) - Get Amazon.com Inc. Report is worth $62.7 billion less than at the beginning of January. Bezos is no longer the second richest man in the world. He gave up this position to the French businessman Bernard Arnault, CEO of the luxury group LVMH (LVMHF) (Dior, Louis Vuitton etc...)Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report and the fifth-richest person in the world, lost $33.3 billion, while Steve Ballmer, the former CEO of the software giant, saw his fortune decrease by $23.7 billion. Ballmer is the ninth richest in the world. Larry Page, the seventh richest on the planet and co-founder of Alphabet, is worth $39.0 billion less than in January, while Sergey Brin, the other co-founder of the internet giant saw his fortune drop by $37.9 billion. Brin is ranked 8th world's richest person.Finally, Larry Ellison, the founder of Oracle (ORCL) - Get Oracle Corporation Report and eleventh richest man in the world, has seen his net wealth decrease by $26.7 billion since January, while that of Michael Dell, founder of Dell Technologies (DELL) - Get Dell Technologies Inc. Class C Report and 24th richest man in the world, is worth $12.0 billion less compared to January.The fortunes on paper of these tech billionaires are mainly based on their actions within their companies. Some will say that the decline in their wealth is a return to normal after it soared during the pandemic.Interestingly, only six people in the top 25 wealthiest people on the planet have seen an increase in their wealth since January. Among them is Chinese tech tycoon Zhang Yiming, whose wealth has increased by $10.4 billion since January, making him the 20th-richest person on the planet. He is the founder of Bytedance, the parent company of popular short video platform TikTok and its Chinese version Douyin.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article267388142.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Software giant hasn't said it will protect user data in wake of Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe.Microsoft plans to assist women financially and will cover travel expenses for abortions since Roe v. Wade was overturned but remains tight-lipped about protecting consumer data.The tech giant is mum about ensuring privacy and deleting data such as geolocation since some people will have to travel to other states to obtain an abortion, a major concern for women and other supporters of abortion rights. Data such as texts and web searches can be used against women and people either seeking abortions or providing support since as travel or housing in states that are making aid a criminal offense. Will Microsoft Comply with a Subpoena?Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report has not addressed whether it will delete the location history of individuals or other data and whether it would comply with requests for subpoenas from law enforcement agencies.When TheStreet reached out with specific questions about whether data would be eliminated from the servers or if the company would comply with subpoenas, Microsoft declined to comment.Tech behemoth Alphabet's Google (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Report took a proactive stance on Friday and said it would eliminate some user data, such as geolocation.Google said it will delete a person's location history for going to an abortion clinic and has been more proactive than other tech companies such as Apple (AAPL) - Get Apple Inc. Report who have also remained silent on this topic.People who use mapping apps from Google will have more privacy since the company said it will delete location histories for various locations such as abortion clinics and domestic violence shelters. The change will take place in the \"coming weeks,\" Jen Fitzpatrick, a senior vice president of Core wrote in a blog post on July 1.The company's change in policy was in response to people who sought to limit the amount of information collected on them since several states have indicated they would conduct abortion investigations and prosecutions.Google said it plans to delete the location history after a person has visited medical facilities such as abortion clinics, domestic violence shelters, counseling centers, fertility centers, addiction treatment facilities, cosmetic surgery clinics, weight loss clinics and others.Multi-Factor AuthenticationConsumers can also change and delete their personal information at any time for Google Fit and Fitbit, a fitness monitoring device. \"For example, Fitbit users who have chosen to track their menstrual cycles in the app can currently delete menstruation logs one at a time, and we will be rolling out updates that let users delete multiple logs at once,\" Fitzpatrick wrote.Whether Microsoft will change its stance remains unknown. The company has only discussed how they would support women financially if they plan to travel to other states to seek an abortion, which was mentioned by Microsoft President Brad Smith said in an interview with GeekWire last week at his office in Redmond, Washington.\"And so our first principle is to honor the ability of our employees to continue to make their own choices, to enable women who work at Microsoft to travel to another state, if that is what they want to need to do, for this type of medical service, an abortion,\" he said.One step that the company took in late May was to turn on multi-factor authentication and changing other default settings,\"One of the concerns, even criticisms, that some people had was that we were not doing everything we could to protect people using our products, because we didn’t turn on so much by default,\" Smith said. While Smith did not address the issue of securing more privacy for consumers, he said Microsoft has \"more work to do.\"\"How do we ensure that our processes are working well, and especially as we come out of COVID, and we try to find our way towards whatever the new normal is going to be, let’s make sure that we continue to improve in this space. And we have But I hope that people know how committed we are to doing it.Microsoft's Current Privacy PolicyMicrosoft has numerous applications and software, including Outlook.com, Skype, OneDrive, or Xbox or a personal Microsoft email account.The company does allow people to view the data about them that is saved to the cloud.\"Your privacy dashboard is the place where you can view and clear data that Microsoft saves to the cloud,\" the company said. \"This data includes your browsing and Bing search history, location data, apps and services activity, and more.\"Microsoft allows consumers to view their data and delete it, although eliminating it has to be completed separately.The company says that people can delete their search history from Bing, files from OneDrive, emails, calendar and contacts via Outlook.com, chats and conversations from Skype, but only some data can be eliminated from Xbox via the website or console.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article263231393.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Business100 Highest Paid CEOs in America By Ben Wittstein, Stacker News On 2/6/21 at 11:00 AM EST Share Share on Facebook Share on TwitterShare on LinkedIn Share on PinterestShare on RedditShare on Flipboard Share via Email Comments Business CEO Business Netflix FacebookAmong the hotly contested debates in the contemporary United States is what to make of the vast discrepancy that exists between the salaries of the country's top-earning CEOs and the average worker within their companies. While some people are outraged by the fact that Walmart CEO Doug McMillon raked in more than 1,000 times what his median employee made in 2017, others argue that the ratio is justified and not indicative of a problem in need of rectifying. Alex Edmans of the Harvard Business Review likens the discrepancy to that of a band's lead singer and bassist, alluding to the fact that people who perform tasks of varying levels of importance in a company ought to receive compensation that reflects these differing contributions. Ore Huiying / Getty Images for Netflix Using data from the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, Stacker listed the 100 highest-paid CEOs in the United States according to what they made in 2019 or 2020. The data is accurate as of Jan. 14, 2021, and any changes in the company or its CEO are noted with an asterisk.Read on to see how much the chief executives of top companies made.You may also like: What retirement is like in 50 places around the world Tada Images / Shutterstock 100. Richard Wallace (KLA Corporation)- 2019 salary: $20,512,367 - Median worker pay: $85,968 (239:1 ratio) BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Getty Images 99. Darius Adamczyk (Honeywell International Inc.)- 2019 salary: $20,525,104 - Median worker pay: $69,513 (295:1 ratio) SOPA Images / Getty Images 98. David Meredith (Everbridge, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $20,536,615 - Median worker pay: $75,599 (272:1 ratio) Sundry Photography / Shutterstock 97. Matthew Murphy (Marvell Technology Group Ltd.)- 2020 salary: $20,624,344 - Median worker pay: $152,014 (136:1 ratio) Grant Lamos IV / Getty Images 96. Marc Holliday (SL Green Realty Corp.)- 2019 salary: $20,990,016 - Median worker pay: $71,887 (292:1 ratio) Rick Diamond / Getty Images 95. W. McMullen (The Kroger Co.)- 2020 salary: $21,129,648 - Median worker pay: $26,790 (789:1 ratio) chainarong06 / Shutterstock 94. Chad Richison (Paycom Software, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,138,558 - Median worker pay: $64,408 (328:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 93. Juan Alaix (Zoetis Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,145,419 - Median worker pay: $76,949 (275:1 ratio) Michael Vi / Shutterstock 92. David Ricks (Eli Lilly and Company)- 2019 salary: $21,283,242 - Median worker pay: $96,290 (221:1 ratio) Kimberly White / Getty Images for TechCrunch) 91. John Foley (Peloton Interactive, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,359,700You may also like: The Top 73 College Majors Where Most Students Go on to Grad School Christian Petersen / Getty Images 90. Andrew Wilson (Electronic Arts Inc.)- 2020 salary: $21,365,751 - Median worker pay: $97,986 (218:1 ratio) Drew Angerer / Getty Images 89. Christopher Nassetta (Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,374,121 - Median worker pay: $43,695 (489:1 ratio) Patrick McMullan / Getty Images 88. Fabrizio Freda (The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,435,428 - Median worker pay: $30,733 (697:1 ratio) lev radin / Shutterstock 87. Leonard Schleifer (Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,455,117 - Median worker pay: $139,055 (154:1 ratio) Riccardo Savi / Getty Images for Concordia Summit) 86. Gregory Hayes (Raytheon Technologies Corp.)- 2019 salary: $21,538,847 - Median worker pay: $76,417 (282:1 ratio) Dmitry Kalinovsky / Shutterstock 85. Richard Gonzalez (AbbVie Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,610,598 - Median worker pay: $155,885 (139:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 84. William Stone (SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,620,325 - Median worker pay: $133,054 (162:1 ratio) Drew Angerer / Getty Images 83. Mary Barra (General Motors Company)- 2019 salary: $21,630,867 - Median worker pay: $106,715 (203:1 ratio) SOPA Images / Getty Images 82. Samuel Allen (Deere & Company)- 2019 salary: $21,697,885 - Median worker pay: $80,267 (270:1 ratio) R.Danyliuk / Shutterstock 81. James Robo (NextEra Energy, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $21,877,597 - Median worker pay: $129,735 (168:1 ratio)You may also like: The 50 Most Common Jobs Women Held 100 Years Ago Rick T. Wilking / Getty Images 80. C. McMillon (Walmart Inc.)- 2020 salary: $22,105,350 - Median worker pay: $22,484 (983:1 ratio) Steven Ferdman / Getty Images 79. Andre Calantzopoulos (Philip Morris International Inc.)- 2019 salary: $22,125,060 - Median worker pay: $54,086 (396:1 ratio) Syda Productions / Shutterstock 78. Ari Bousbib (IQVIA Holdings, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $22,139,776 - Median worker pay: $118,891 (186:1 ratio) picture alliance via Getty Images 77. Stephen Angel (Linde Plc)- 2019 salary: $22,475,878 - Median worker pay: $43,216 (520:1 ratio) MIND AND I / Shutterstock 76. Therese Tucker (BlackLine, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $22,552,158 - Median worker pay: $176,747 (128:1 ratio) Bennett Raglin / Getty Images for iHeartMedia 75. Robert Pittman (iHeartMedia, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $22,868,420 - Median worker pay: $56,068 (408:1 ratio) GLENN CHAPMAN/AFP / Getty Images 74. Steven Mollenkopf (QUALCOMM Incorporated)- 2019 salary: $23,065,052 - Median worker pay: $90,259 (256:1 ratio) Win McNamee / Getty Images 73. Ajay Banga (Mastercard Incorporated)- 2019 salary: $23,249,977 - Median worker pay: $138,142 (168:1 ratio) BERTRAND GUAY/AFP / Getty Images 72. Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $23,415,973 - Median worker pay: $247,883 (94:1 ratio) Mark Schiefelbein/Pool / Getty Images 71. Darren Woods (Exxon Mobil Corporation)- 2019 salary: $23,494,929 - Median worker pay: $173,712 (135:1 ratio)You may also like: These Are the Most Sleep-Deprived Professions Jan Orlowski / Shutterstock 70. Gregory Brown (Motorola Solutions, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $23,619,990 - Median worker pay: $93,750 (252:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 69. Stephen Squeri (American Express Company)- 2019 salary: $23,796,002 - Median worker pay: $64,803 (367:1 ratio) Scott Olson / Getty Images 68. Nikesh Arora (Palo Alto Networks, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $23,885,839 - Median worker pay: $219,722 (109:1 ratio) Jonathan Weiss / Shutterstock 67. Gary Heminger (Marathon Petroleum Corporation)- 2019 salary: $24,129,164 - Median worker pay: $27,507 (877:1 ratio) Matej Kastelic / Shutterstock 66. Jay Horgen (Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $24,197,628 - Median worker pay: $160,697 (151:1 ratio) A_stockphoto / Shutterstock 65. Michael Lamach (Trane Technologies Plc)- 2019 salary: $24,217,128 - Median worker pay: $54,757 (442:1 ratio) Michael Kovac / Getty Images 64. Alfred Kelly Jr. (Visa Inc.)- 2019 salary: $24,265,771 - Median worker pay: $142,494 (170:1 ratio) val lawless / Shutterstock 63. Ronald Rittenmeyer (Tenet Healthcare Corporation)- 2019 salary: $24,288,660 - Median worker pay: $53,714 (452:1 ratio) FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP / Getty Images 62. Laurence Fink (BlackRock, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $24,308,254 - Median worker pay: $133,644 (182:1 ratio) Spotmatik Ltd / Shutterstock 61. Alan Miller (Universal Health Services, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $24,473,240 - Median worker pay: $38,931 (629:1 ratio)You may also like: These States Have the Highest Earning Politicians Ken Wolter / Shutterstock 60. James Cracchiolo (Ameriprise Financial, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $24,516,930 - Median worker pay: $106,428 (230:1 ratio) Jonathan Weiss / Shutterstock 59. H. Culp Jr. (General Electric Company)- 2019 salary: $24,553,788 - Median worker pay: $50,471 (486:1 ratio) Paul Morigi / Getty Images for Fortune 58. David Solomon (The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $24,657,737 - Median worker pay: $138,854 (178:1 ratio) Bob Riha, Jr. / Getty Images 57. Sheldon Adelson (Las Vegas Sands Corp.)- 2019 salary: $24,680,118 - Median worker pay: $42,228 (584:1 ratio) JIM WATSON/AFP / Getty Images 56. N. Linebarger (Cummins Inc.)- 2019 salary: $25,116,751 - Median worker pay: $73,480 (342:1 ratio) JIM WATSON/AFP / Getty Images 55. Alex Gorsky (Johnson & Johnson)- 2019 salary: $25,365,777 - Median worker pay: $76,000 (334:1 ratio) Tom Williams / Getty Images 54. Michael Corbat (Citigroup Inc.)- 2019 salary: $25,508,761 - Median worker pay: $52,988 (482:1 ratio) Michael Loccisano / Getty Images 53. Daniel Schulman (PayPal Holdings, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $25,825,473 - Median worker pay: $70,405 (367:1 ratio) Ken Wolter / Shutterstock 52. Charles Robbins (Cisco Systems, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $25,829,833 - Median worker pay: $142,593 (181:1 ratio) Steven Ferdman / Getty Images 51. Elizabeth Barrett (UroGen Pharma Ltd.)- 2019 salary: $25,900,823 - Median worker pay: $223,867 (116:1 ratio)You may also like: The Highest Paying Jobs That Require No Degree Roy Rochlin / Getty Images 50. Marc Benioff (salesforce.com, inc.)- 2020 salary: $25,969,494 - Median worker pay: $167,750 (155:1 ratio) John Lamparski / Getty Images 49. Brian Moynihan (Bank of America Corporation)- 2019 salary: $26,039,213 - Median worker pay: $94,256 (276:1 ratio) Michael Vi / Shutterstock 48. Mohan Maheswaran (Semtech Corporation)- 2020 salary: $26,095,955 - Median worker pay: $84,458 (309:1 ratio) bogdanhoda / Shutterstock 47. Neil Kumar (BridgeBio Pharma, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $26,334,063 UfaBizPhoto / Shutterstock 46. Glenn Fusfield (OneSpaWorld Holdings Ltd.)- 2019 salary: $26,381,708 Steven Ferdman / Getty Images 45. Michael Neidorff (Centene Corporation)- 2019 salary: $26,438,425 - Median worker pay: $68,987 (383:1 ratio) Rusty Russell / Getty Images 44. Samuel Hazen (HCA Healthcare, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $26,788,251 - Median worker pay: $56,012 (478:1 ratio) Tada Images / Shutterstock 43. Jeffery Yabuki (Fiserv, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $27,601,026 - Median worker pay: $65,254 (423:1 ratio) ERIC PIERMONT/AFP / Getty Images 42. Kenneth Frazier (Merck & Co., Inc.)- 2019 salary: $27,648,475 - Median worker pay: $95,621 (289:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 41. Gary Norcross (Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $27,658,117 - Median worker pay: $59,235 (467:1 ratio)You may also like: Best Place to Live in Every State John Moore / Getty Images 40. John Legere (T-Mobile US, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $27,756,690 - Median worker pay: $62,195 (446:1 ratio) Scott Olson / Getty Images 39. Miles White (Abbott Laboratories)- 2019 salary: $27,802,817 - Median worker pay: $84,434 (329:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 38. Thomas Fanning (The Southern Company)- 2019 salary: $27,865,185 - Median worker pay: $167,872 (166:1 ratio) Tada Images / Shutterstock 37. Joseph Gorder (Valero Energy Corporation)- 2019 salary: $28,200,511 - Median worker pay: $272,417 (103:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 36. William Brown (L3Harris Technologies, Inc.)- 2020 salary: $29,037,879 - Median worker pay: $58,426 (269:1 ratio) JIM WATSON/AFP / Getty Images 35. Daniel O'Day (Gilead Sciences, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $29,107,854 - Median worker pay: $173,264 (169:1 ratio) Bobby Kotick / Wikimedia Commons 34. Robert Kotick (Activision Blizzard, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $30,122,896 - Median worker pay: $94,308 (319:1 ratio) JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 33. David Ossip (Ceridian HCM Holding, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $30,180,957 JHVEPhoto / Shutterstock 32. Ryan Lance (ConocoPhillips)- 2019 salary: $30,363,744 - Median worker pay: $186,334 (163:1 ratio) Kimberly White / Getty Images for PARS EQUALITY CENTER 31. Hamid Moghadam (Prologis, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $30,383,438 - Median worker pay: $117,751 (258:1 ratio)You may also like: Jobs That Might Not Exist in 50 Years Fortune Live Media / Flickr 30. Marillyn Hewson (Lockheed Martin Corporation)- 2019 salary: $30,913,982 - Median worker pay: $154,883 (200:1 ratio) Ken Wolter / Shutterstock 29. Michael O'Sullivan (Burlington Stores, Inc.)- 2020 salary: $31,056,597 - Median worker pay: $11,583 (3,030:1 ratio) World Economic Forum / Wikimedia Commons 28. James Dimon (JPMorgan Chase & Co.)- 2019 salary: $31,612,616 - Median worker pay: $80,431 (393:1 ratio) Owen Hoffmann / Getty Images 27. James Gorman (Morgan Stanley)- 2019 salary: $31,642,395 - Median worker pay: $127,414 (248:1 ratio) Kevin Tichenor / Shutterstock 26. Greg Garland (Phillips 66)- 2019 salary: $31,900,878 - Median worker pay: $188,738 (169:1 ratio) Robert Scoble / Wikimedia Commons 25. Randall Stephenson (AT&T Inc.)- 2019 salary: $32,032,925 - Median worker pay: $98,630 (325:1 ratio) John Lamparski / Getty Images 24. Mario Gabelli (GAMCO Investors, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $32,236,004 Justin Sullivan / Getty Images 23. Michael Wirth (Chevron Corporation)- 2019 salary: $33,070,662 - Median worker pay: $140,063 (236:1 ratio) Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc / Getty Images 22. Charles Scharf (Wells Fargo & Company)- 2019 salary: $34,286,574 - Median worker pay: $65,931 (550:1 ratio) Cineberg / Shutterstock 21. Donald Umpleby III (Caterpillar Inc.)- 2019 salary: $34,519,129 - Median worker pay: $65,132 (530:1 ratio)You may also like: Youngest Billionaires in America Joshua Rainey Photography / Shutterstock 20. Brian Roberts (Comcast Corporation)- 2019 salary: $36,370,183 - Median worker pay: $78,869 (461:1 ratio) MANDEL NGAN/AFP / Getty Images 19. Larry Merlo (CVS Health Corporation)- 2019 salary: $36,451,749 - Median worker pay: $46,140 (790:1 ratio) Ore Huiying / Getty Images for Netflix 18. Reed Hastings (Netflix, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $38,577,129 - Median worker pay: $202,931 (190:1 ratio) John Lamparski / Getty Images 17. Shantanu Narayen (Adobe, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $39,145,631 - Median worker pay: $147,115 (266:1 ratio) Sundry Photography / Shutterstock 16. William McDermott (ServiceNow, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $41,682,335 Drew Angerer / Getty Images 15. Lachlan Murdoch (Fox Corporation)- 2019 salary: $42,111,103 Spencer Platt / Getty Images 14. Dara Khosrowshahi (Uber Technologies, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $42,428,233 The India Today Group / Getty Images 13. Patrick Gelsinger (VMware, Inc.)- 2020 salary: $42,549,725 - Median worker pay: $139,046 (306:1 ratio) Stephen Brashear / Getty Images 12. Satya Nadella (Microsoft Corporation)- 2019 salary: $42,910,215 - Median worker pay: $172,512 (249:1 ratio) Monica Schipper / Getty Images 11. Miguel Patricio (The Kraft Heinz Company)- 2019 salary: $43,297,480 - Median worker pay: $42,689 (1,034:1 ratio)You may also like: 30 of the Most Bizarre Inventions in History Scott Olson / Getty Images 10. Gregory Maffei (Liberty Media Corp.)- 2019 salary: $44,045,070 - Median worker pay: $93,055 (473:1 ratio) James Goulden Photography / Getty Images for SXSW 9. Martine Rothblatt (United Therapeutics Corporation)- 2019 salary: $45,635,037 - Median worker pay: $196,979 (232:1 ratio) Roy Rochlin / Getty Images 8. David Zaslav (Discovery, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $45,843,912 - Median worker pay: $79,343 (578:1 ratio) Scott Olson / Getty Images 7. Benjamin Silbermann (Pinterest, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $46,222,113 Kimberly White / Getty Images for Vanity Fair 6. Robert Iger (The Walt Disney Company)- 2019 salary: $47,517,762 - Median worker pay: $52,184 (911:1 ratio) Sopotnicki / Shutterstock 5. John Plant (Howmet Aerospace Inc.)- 2019 salary: $51,712,578 - Median worker pay: $55,497 (934:1 ratio) Maddie Meyer / Getty Images 4. James Dolan (Madison Square Garden Sports Corp.)- 2019 salary: $54,116,491 - Median worker pay: $18,650 (2,902:1 ratio) Victor Moussa / Shutterstock 3. Lisa Su (Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.)- 2019 salary: $58,534,288 - Median worker pay: $96,874 (604:1 ratio) picture alliance / Getty Images 2. Robert Swan (Intel Corporation)- 2019 salary: $66,935,100 - Median worker pay: $96,300 (695:1 ratio) Alex Wong / Getty Images 1. Sundar Pichai (Alphabet Inc.)- 2019 salary: $280,621,552 - Median worker pay: $258,708 (1,085:1 ratio)You may also like: 25 Companies You Might Not Know Are Owned By Disney Request Reprint & Licensing, Submit Correction or view Editorial Guidelines ",
"URL": "https://www.newsweek.com/100-highest-paid-ceos-america-1566645"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Publish Date January 11, 2021 ‘I’ll Teams you’: Employees assume security of links, file sharing via Microsoft comms platform Bradley Barth Follow @bbb1216bbb Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Print Share by Email Pictured: a building at Microsoft Corporation headquarters in Redmond, Washington. (Coolcaesar/CC BY-SA 4.0via Wikimedia Commons) Microsoft Teams is prone to the same phishing hazards, impersonation scams and privacy violations as email is, yet many users naïvely treat this and other workplace communications platforms with inherent trust. As a result, they often share sensitive information too freely or click links and open attachments that in an email they might ignore, warns a new report. Over the past year, the rapid adoption and increased usage of platforms such as Teams, Slack or Google Hangouts due to COVID-19 has only increased the likelihood that a growing number of cybercriminals will try to take advantage of this misplaced trust. “As workers move away from email and use messaging platforms… malicious actors have followed them. With a lack of training and awareness of risks, users are willing to share more on business messaging platforms, as they think other users can be trusted,†said Chris Hazelton, director of security solutions at Lookout. Consequently, it is up to employers to ensure that their workers are properly trained in the responsible usage of these applications. Released today, the Microsoft Teams Security Report was authored by cloud email security company Avanan, a Microsoft partner that analyzed nearly 200 enterprise customers over a two-month span in a quest to seek out vulnerabilities, exploits and attacks related to Teams usage. Gil Friedrich, CEO of Avanan Gil Friedrich, CEO of Avanan, told SC Media in an interview that when adversaries target prospective victims, there is a notable difference between email and Teams. With email, anyone can directly reach out to any known email addresses of choice, but a Teams message requires that the sender and recipient are part of the same group account or channel. But users shouldn’t assume this makes them safe, as this is not as great of an obstacle as it appears. The problem is that group accounts can quickly become large and unwieldly with multiple third-party partners all on the same channel. And if just one user among these partners is compromised and ultimately impersonated, then all members of that channel can potentially be tricked. “And so you should be more careful in those environments with data you share as well as that with the things you download, etc., because you can’t really control the security of your partners,” said Friedrich to SC Media. Indeed, one of the most significant discoveries by Avanan researchers was an actual malware attack directed against an unnamed financial firm that was working with a third-party partner organization with whom it communicated via a shared Teams channel. Apparently, the partner had one of its accounts compromised for a year. Cleverly, the malicious actors didn’t immediately force the issue and attack. Instead, they performed reconnaissance, collected intel and strategically waited for an organic opportunity to send a malicious file. Only after the hackers observed a request for files, did they strike, sending a malicious zip file that purportedly contained the requested documents. In reality, the zip file actually included a Remote Access Trojan that enables desktop monitoring and control. “In order to evade detection in this new medium, hackers would rather wait for when they can make the biggest impact with the least possible detection,†the report says. For that reason, a Teams-based phishing campaign might exhibit more strategic patience on the part of the attacker than an email-based phishing campaign. Friedrich said that Avanan blocked the attack, and the financial firm at least temporarily expelled outside organizations from its Teams channel, limiting it to internal communications. But how was the initial third-party compromise accomplished in the first place? According to the report, there are various ways to hijack or steal one’s Team account credentials. For starters, Teams uses the same credentials as Microsoft 365. So if someone’s Microsoft 365 credentials are stolen, so are his or her Teams credentials. Additionally, Avanan discovered viral malicious GIF image of a cat that was uploaded to Teams and shared with users. Clicking on it would allow malicious hackers to harvest a user’s session token, and then impersonate that individual. The Avanan report also notes how some organizations allow external users to join a group and create an account using any random identity and photo they so choose – a feature that could result in an impersonation scam. Indeed, the aforementioned financial institution attackers leveraged this very feature, disguising themselves as a legitimate user. Importantly, the study also noted that Teams users can pose a danger to themselves even without the interference of an attacker. For instance, some users share highly sensitive data via Teams with users who are both inside and outside of their immediate organizations – thereby running the risk of data loss or even privacy violations. “Users may assume that others in a group can be trusted, believing users are vetted before being added. This can lead to leakage of corporate data that would not otherwise be shared,” said Hazelton. “Teams [the product]… has the inherent ability to mislead users that all others are on the same side. The psychology of information security plays a role here,†said Mark Kedgley, chief technology officer at New Net Technologies. “Collaboration requires a certain level of trust, which is often established by management directives (‘We are going to cooperate with company XYZ; the NDA is already in place’), which adds to the misleading. The need to differentiate between each business partnership and what kind of information can be shared is also often diminished as staff is not properly trained.†In one case, a hospital customer of Avanan that uses Teams was found to liberally share patients’ medical information with hundreds of end users via the platform. “Medical staff generally know the security rules and risk of sharing information via email, but ignore those when it comes to Teams. In their mind, everything can be sent,†the report states. For example, “medical information, procedures and family circumstances of a minor, was shared together with her name and social security number,†the report says. And while the use of Teams might help doctors communicate quickly to make life-saving decisions, it still shows they may need more guidance on use of the platform. “When companies use Teams, they assume it is internal and unmonitored. Accordingly, the end-user behavior we identified during this analysis observed free sharing of all data. End-users freely share files, data, spreadsheets and sensitive information, often without thinking,†the report says. “There’s something very casual, almost instantaneous” about many of these conversations, said Friedrich. Original cartoon courtesy of Avanan. Indeed, Teams is built for quick communication among parties with a shared interest. Because of that, links in chats are not scanned. Files are scanned as they’re saved to OneDrive, but only for known malware signatures and not in real time – so in that sense it’s easier to sneak in malware undetected. (Adding Microsoft ATP protection helps, though this too can be bypassed by determined attackers.) “The way around it is to educate your users to be more careful with that content and just to know that this is how this platform behaves,” explained Friedrich. Malware, impersonation and lateral attackers were identified as the most popular threats affecting Teams users. Additionally, Avanan researchers foundation a zero-click cross-site scripting vulnerability that Microsoft repaired last December. In addition to better training and education, experts had suggestions for how companies can reduce the risk of such threats. “More focus on least privilege is needed as it’s still too common for users to run with local admin rights,†said Kedgley. Additionally, organizations should follow “config hardening guidance from the CIS or STIG playbooks.” Email and office applications provide a whole bunch of hardened settings to combat malware and phishing, but too few organizations make use of them. Change control and vulnerability management as core security controls should be in place as well. “Organizations need to add security in the cloud and across all the endpoints: laptops, phones, and tablets – wherever these conversations are taking place,” said Hazelton. “This will allow organizations to identify phishing attacks as they happen, and quickly react when malware is introduced through a messaging platform.†Friedrich said Microsoft was a cooperative partner throughout the study. “They have all the interest to make [Teams] as secure as possible for their customers. So we got a lot of support from from their engineering team,” including having advanced access to the Teams API. Microsoft did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Topics: Application security Phishing Privacy Google outage tied to authentication system outage, not supply chain attacks ",
"URL": "https://www.scmagazine.com/application-security/ill-teams-you-employees-assume-security-of-links-file-sharing-via-microsoft-comms-platform/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "STAY TUNED On Fox News: Fox & Friends , 6 a.m. ET: An exclusive interview with Defense Sec. Patrick Shanahan. Former DNC Chair Donna Brazile on the top headlines of the morning. Former NFL player John Urschel on what math teachers can learn from football coaches. A behind-the-scenes look at the first Fox Nation summit. Tucker Carlson Tonight , 8 p.m. ET: Part 2 of Tucker's special series, \"Homelessness in America.\" Hannity , 9 p.m. ET: Special guests include: U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. Fox Nation : Fox Nation Summit - An opportunity for Fox fans in Scottsdale, Ariz. to meet and greet our Fox Nation hosts, participate in interactive events, and be part of the studio audience for a live Fox Nation special. Fox Nation stars will also have a Q-and-A with fans. Click here to find out more. On Fox Business: Mornings with Maria , 6 a.m. ET: Special guests include: George Papadopoulos, former adviser to President Trump; Chris Hogan, host of \"The Chris Hogan Show\"; Bob Herbold, retired executive vice president and chief operating officer of Microsoft Corporation and managing director of the Herbold Group, LLC, Varney & Co. , 9 a.m. ET: U.S. Sens.John Thune, R-S.D.; John Kennedy, R-La.; Bob Portman, R-Ohio. On Fox News Radio: The Fox News Rundown podcast : \"Carter Page on the Mueller report\" - Carter Page was acting as candidate Donald Trump’s foreign policy adviser during the 2016 presidential campaign when he found himself at the center of why the Mueller report got started. He joins the podcast to share his story. The families of 911 victims were in court Monday, in hopes a judge will force the FBI to declassify documents and release names of those who allegedly helped Al Qaeda from inside the U.S. Fox News' David Lee Miller and former FBI investigator Bill Daly weigh in. Plus, commentary by Karol Markowicz, columnist for FOXNews.com and the New York Post. Want the Fox News Rundown sent straight to your mobile device? Subscribe through Apple Podcasts , Google Play , and Stitcher . The Brian Kilmeade Show , 9 a.m. ET: A.B. Stoddard, associate editor and columnist at RealClearPolitics, and former U.S. Rep. Allen West will take on the top headlines of the day. Shannon Bream and David Cone will give the inside stories on their respective new books.",
"URL": "https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/today-on-fox-news-march-14-2019"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Microsoft will pay $26 million to settle claims that it violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act when a handful of Hungarian employees inflated margins on software sales to fund an improper payment scheme. Tech is not your friend. We are. Sign up for The Tech Friend newsletter. ArrowRight Microsoft didn’t admit or deny wrongdoing, according to the settlement documents. But in an email to employees Monday, President and Chief Legal Officer Brad Smith said that the claims “involved employee misconduct that was completely unacceptable” and that the employees involved and the partners with whom they worked “behaved in a wholly unethical manner.” From 2013 to 2015, senior employees in Microsoft’s Hungary operations sold software to local resellers at a discount, and those partners, in turn, sold the products to the Hungarian government at closer to full prices, the Wall Street Journal reported last summer. In one 2014 case, Microsoft Hungary employees received a 27.85 percent discount for software to be sold to Hungary’s National Tax and Customs Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission, one of the U.S. agencies with which Microsoft settled, said in a cease-and-desist order Monday. The reseller handling that account didn’t pass along the full discount and used a portion of the difference “to fund improper payments to government officials,” the agency said. While the SEC noted that Microsoft cooperated with the investigation, it said in an order Monday, that the company did not have “sufficient procedures in place to determine whether the discount requests were legitimate and whether the approved discounts were being passed on to end customers.” The agency said that the “improper payments” generated $13.78 million in business for Microsoft. The company agreed to pay that amount to the SEC plus $2.78 million in interest. The company’s Hungarian subsidiary also entered into a nonprosecution agreement with the Justice Department and agreed to pay it $8.75 million. U.S. probes whether partners of Microsoft bribed foreign officials The SEC also cited instances of poor accounting controls in Saudi Arabia, Thailand and Turkey that led to delays in detecting employee abuse. Rather than elaborate kickback schemes, the agency found, for example, a $440,000 “slush fund” in Saudi Arabia “used to pay travel expenses for Saudi government employees and for gifts, furniture, laptops, tablets and other equipment for government agencies.” Federal regulators have previously investigated Microsoft’s tactics in China, Italy and Romania for violations of foreign corruption laws. The company declined to say whether any other investigations are ongoing. “It’s not appropriate for us to speak on behalf of the government about the status or existence of any inquiries,” Microsoft spokesman Dominic Carr said. Though tech giants such as Google and Facebook have faced fierce scrutiny recently for missteps that have eroded trust , Microsoft has largely avoided criticism. The software giant has even called for greater regulation of facial recognition software, saying the technology is too important for tech giants to police themselves. But allegations of kickbacks and bribery in tech are unusual, even if the total fine is relatively small. “Although Microsoft Hungary did not voluntarily self-disclose the misconduct, Microsoft Hungary received credit for its and Microsoft Corporation’s substantial cooperation with the Department’s investigation and for taking extensive remedial measures,” the Justice Department said in a news release announcing the settlement. Smith noted that the company fired four employees there and terminated business relationships with four resellers. He also said that Microsoft has strengthened its anti-bribery programs and that it has used machine learning to help root out potentially corrupt schemes by employees. Microsoft’s payment is scant relative to some recent payouts for violations of the foreign corruption law. Last month, Walmart agreed to pay $282 million to settle federal criminal and civil charges that it ignored evidence of internal corruption for years that helped fuel its massive overseas expansion. In Walmart’s case, executives were aware of problems with anti-corruption programs at its foreign subsidiaries, including in Mexico, Brazil and China, but failed to act, according to court documents. Is floating a $50 million Trump Tower penthouse for Vladimir Putin illegal? Though Smith said there was a need for “strong laws and effective enforcement by agencies such as the DOJ and the SEC,” the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act has its detractors, including President Trump. He told CNBC in 2012, “It’s a horrible law, and it should be changed,” arguing that it is wrong for U.S. prosecutors to hold company’s accountable for conduct abroad.",
"URL": "https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/07/22/microsoft-pay-million-settle-probe-into-hungarian-kickback-scheme/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Publish Date September 27, 2019 Fileless malware campaign abuses legit tools Node.js and WinDivert Bradley Barth Follow @bbb1216bbb Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Print Share by Email An attack campaign targeting primarily the U.S. and Europe is leveraging two legitimate tools, the Node.js framework and WinDivert, to install “fileless” malware that appears to either turn victims’ systems into proxies or perpetrates click fraud. Researchers from both Microsoft Corporation and Cisco Talos yesterday filed separate reports warning of this campaign, which they have named Nodersok or Divergent, respectively. Microsoft, which discovered the campaign in mid-July, said thousands of machines have been targeted in the last several weeks alone, the majority of which belong to consumers. However, roughly three percent of attacks have hit organizations, particularly educational institutions. The U.S. has been targeted 60 percent of the time, followed by the U.K. (21 percent), Germany (8 percent), Italy (5 percent), France (3 percent) and Sweden (1 percent). “The campaign is particularly interesting not only because it employs advanced fileless techniques, but also because it relies on an elusive network infrastructure that causes the attack to fly under the radar,” said Microsoft’s blog post report, authored by the Microsoft Defender ATP Research Team. Users are typically infected while browsing online, either by clicking on a malicious HTA file or when served a malvertisement. The JavaScript code in the HTA file downloads a second-stage component, which in turns launches PowerShell commands by hiding the encoded command text inside of an environment variable. These commands then download and execute multiple encrypted components with various functions. Among these components are Node.exe from Node.JS — a framework that can execute JavaScript outside of a web browser — and a shellcode to run WinDivert (Windows Packet Divert), a user-mode packet capture-and-divert package. “The use of NodeJS is not something commonly seen across malware families,” said Talos in its own blog post report. Microsoft and Talos diverge on what the actual purpose of Divergence is. The former believes its purpose is to turn infected machines into zombie proxies, while the latter believes click fraud is the end game, noting that the malware is similar to other fileless malware families, especially Kovter. Fileless malware programs that use legitimate tool to function are considered a particularly troublesome threat because it allows attackers to reduce their footprint and give threat researchers little forensic evidence to work with. Topics: Cybercrime Malvertising Malware Recommended For You You must be a registered member of SC Media to post a comment Please register or login first to post a comment. Login Register Attackers trojanize Windows Narrator tool to spy on Asian tech firms ",
"URL": "https://www.scmagazine.com/home/security-news/malware/fileless-malware-campaign-abuses-legit-tools-node-js-and-windivert/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, July 22, 2019 Hungary Subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation Agrees to Pay $8.7 Million in Criminal Penalties to Resolve Foreign Bribery Case Microsoft Magyarország Számítástechnikai Szolgáltató és Kereskedelmi Kft. (Microsoft Hungary), a wholly owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation, has agreed to pay a criminal penalty of more than $8.7 million to resolve the government’s investigation into violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) arising out of a bid rigging and bribery scheme in connection with the sale of Microsoft software licenses to Hungarian government agencies. Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman of the Southern District of New York and Assistant Director Robert Johnson of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division made the announcement. According to Microsoft Hungary’s admissions, beginning by at least 2013 and continuing until at least 2015, a senior executive and other employees of Microsoft Hungary participated in a scheme to inflate margins in the Microsoft sales channel in connection with the sale of Microsoft software licenses to Hungarian government agencies. In furtherance of that scheme, Microsoft Hungary executives and employees falsely represented to Microsoft that steep discounts were necessary to conclude deals with resellers who bid for the opportunity to sell Microsoft licenses to government customers. In actuality, the savings were not passed on to the government customers, but instead were used for corrupt purposes and were falsely recorded as “discounts” and stored in various tools and databases on Microsoft servers in the United States in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Microsoft Hungary entered into a nonprosecution agreement and agreed to pay a criminal penalty of $8,751,795 to resolve the matter. The Department reached this resolution based on several factors. Although Microsoft Hungary did not voluntarily self-disclose the misconduct, Microsoft Hungary received credit for its and Microsoft Corporation’s substantial cooperation with the Department’s investigation and for taking extensive remedial measures. For example, Microsoft Hungary terminated four licensing partners and Microsoft Corporation has implemented an enhanced system of compliance and internal controls, company-wide, to address and mitigate corruption risks. Accordingly, the criminal penalty reflects a 25 percent reduction off the bottom of the applicable U.S. Sentencing Guidelines fine range for the company’s full cooperation and remediation. In a related matter with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Microsoft Corporation agreed to pay to the SEC disgorgement and prejudgment interest totaling approximately $16,565,151 for conduct in Hungary. The case is being investigated by the FBI’s New York Field Office. Trial Attorneys Derek J. Ettinger and Della Sentilles of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Lai of the Southern District of New York are handling the case. The Fraud Section is responsible for investigating and prosecuting all FCPA matters. Additional information about the Justice Department’s FCPA enforcement efforts can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa . Attachment(s): Download Non-Prosecution Agreement & Statement of Facts Component(s): Criminal Division USAO - New York, Southern Press Release Number: 19-791",
"URL": "https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/hungary-subsidiary-microsoft-corporation-agrees-pay-87-million-criminal-penalties-resolve"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Elon Musk, the only member of this club, was recently ejected following the fall in the market value of Tesla.It is arguably the most elite club in the world. One of those clubs whose entrance looks like the labors of Hercules. Very, very few managed to get in. It is rare to find more than two members at the same time. At the beginning of the year, only one person was often encountered there. That person is Elon Musk, the visionary and whimsical CEO of Tesla (TSLA) - Get Tesla Inc. Report, SpaceX, Twitter (TWTR) - Get Twitter Inc. Report, and two other companies.This club is that of billionaires whose fortune reaches at least $200 billion. Until a few days ago Musk was the only member of this prestigious club but much criticized by liberals who see it as the symbol of the continuous widening of the gap between the haves and the have-nots.Musk's fortune has shrunk by $80.4 billion since January and stands at $190.0 billion as of November 5, according to Bloomberg Billionaires Index. However, he remains the richest man in the world.Musk owes his immense fortune to his Tesla shares. The evolution of the price of Tesla shares thus has an impact on the evolution of the billionaire's fortune. If the electric vehicle maker's stock goes down, it negatively impacts Musk's net wealth on paper.The Top 10 Impacted by Tech WoesSince January, Tesla has seen its market value melt by more than $450 billion, certainly affected by the zero-covid policy in China, the continuous disruptions to supply chains and the soaring prices of raw materials. But the company is also impacted by concerns surrounding the entire tech sector as the economic slowdown could turn into a recession.This macroeconomic environment has important consequences in the ranking of the world's largest fortunes since the top 10 is dominated by Silicon Valley tycoons.The French businessman Bernard Arnault is the second richest man in the world but the fortune of the CEO of the luxury company LVMH (LVMHF) has decreased by $34.4 billion to $144 billion since January.It is the Indian businessman Gautam Adani who is the third richest man on the planet with a fortune estimated at $133 billion. Adani, who is the head of an industrial conglomerate, is the only personality in the top 10 to have seen his fortune increase since January. It's up $56.2 billion.Jeff Bezos is 4th with a fortune valued at $114 billion. The fall of the Amazon founder is the consequence of the sharp drop in the market value of the e-commerce giant, which has been ejected from the club of companies with a market value of more than $1 trillion. Amazon (AMZN) - Get Amazon.com Inc. Report warned that the next few months were going to be very difficult. Bezos has lost $78.4 billion since January.Zuckerberg, the Big LoserBill Gates, co-founder of software giant Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report is the fifth richest man in the world with an estimated fortune of $107 billion, down $31.4 billion since January.Legendary investor Warren Buffet comes in 6th. He is worth $100 billion. Buffett, often hailed for his sound investments, has seen his fortune melt by $8.64 billion since January.There are no other billionaires above $100 billion. The other four members of the top 10 have wealth ranging from $90 billion to $80 billion. Larry Ellison is ranked 7th with a fortune estimated at $90.9 billion. The co-founder of Oracle (ORCL) - Get Oracle Corporation Report lost $16.3 billion this year.Indian businessman Mukesh Ambani is 8th with an estimated wealth of $89 billion, down $986 million in 2022.Larry Page, co-founder of Alphabet (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Report, parent company of Google, is 9th with a net wealth of $81.4 billion, down $47 billion since January. The internet juggernaut recently warned that tough times are ahead.Steve Ballmer, the former CEO of Microsoft, is 10th with a fortune valued at $79.7 billion. His net wealth has decreased by $26 billion since January.It is important to note the downfall of Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of the social media empire Meta Platforms (META) - Get Meta Platforms Inc. Report whose disputed bets on the metaverse contributed to the stock market plunge of the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. Zuckerberg is only the 29th richest person in the world with a fortune valued at $35.2 billion, down $90.3 billion since January.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article268366487.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Facebook (Meta) founder Mark Zuckerberg saw their fortunes go in opposite directions at the end of the week.The fortunes of tech moguls come and go with the stock market performance of their respective companies. When Amazon (AMZN) - Get Amazon.com, Inc. Report stock surged Friday on Wall Street if anyone was to rub their hands and do their math it was Jeff Bezos, the founder of the e-commerce giant.Bezos saw his fortune soar by nearly $19 billion in one day.Bezos Was Once the Richest Man in the WorldThe former richest man in the world took advantage of his group's historic day on the stock market after results that delighted investors.Bezos, who holds 9.85% of the capital of the e-commerce giant according to figures from FactSet, now has a personal fortune estimated at $183 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. He remains behind Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX whose fortune is estimated at 239 billion dollars. Much like Musk, the bulk of Bezos' personal fortune is based on the shares he owns in his companies.His ex-wife, MacKenzie Scott, who recently changed the codes of philanthropy, is also one of the big winners of Amazon's crazy stock market day on Friday, February 4. Her personal fortune grew by $6.54 billion in one day. Scott owns 3.43% of Amazon's stocks according to FactSet. She is the 26th richest person in the world, according to the Bloomberg ranking.Amazon Had a Huge One-Day IncreaseInternet behemoth Amazon AMZN set a new record on Friday when its stock reached the largest increase in market capitalization in history during one day's trading session.Amazon's stock added $191 billion in market value after rising 14% on Friday. This record by Amazon surpasses the one set by Apple (AAPL) - Get Apple Inc. Report just last week when its strong earnings report added $179 billion in value the following day. The previous record for a one-day market cap gain globally was the increase of $597 billion in November 2007 by PetroChina Co (PTR) - Get PetroChina Co. Ltd. Report. If February smiles at Jeff Bezos, another multi-billionaire is in tears. Mark Zuckerberg, the founding CEO of Facebook (FB) - Get Meta Platforms Inc. Class A Report, saw his fortune drop by $36.1 billion in 48 hours. He had to drop a few places in the ranking of the largest fortunes on the planet. Mr. Zuckerberg can always console himself with a fortune estimated at $89.4 billion.Zuckerberg lost almost $30 billion in 24 hours on Thursday following a bad earnings report by Meta, parent company of social media giants Facebook and Instagram.JPMorgan analyst Doug Anmuth said Meta is seeing a \"significant slowdown\" in advertising growth while \"embarking on an expensive, uncertain, multi-year transition\" to the metaverse, the new buzzword in the tech world.It is not to be excluded that Zuckerberg redoes his fortune or that Bezos sees his diminish as things change quickly in the world of tech. Technology stocks are considered as risky assets, in other words the movements, even for big names like Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Google (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Class A Reportor even Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report, can be violent in one direction or the other.Jeff Bezos, for example, lost some $20 billion in the rout of the technology sector in January.However, these large figures will not help the reputation of Bezos, whose image is currently being damaged by reports saying that the Dutch city of Rotterdam will temporarily dismantle part of a historic bridge so that Amazon founder's yacht can fit through it, likely this summer.Bezos’ boat, now called Y721, is being built in the neighboring city of Alblasserdam. It needs to pass through Rotterdam to make it to the North Sea or English channel, but it’s too tall for the Koningshaven Bridge.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article258100353.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Greg Abel bought shares of Berkshire for the first time since he was promoted to vice chairman.Greg Abel, the apparent successor to Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) - Get Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Report (BRK.B) - Get Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Report, who is intended to serve as the CEO of the conglomerate, bought $68 million of the company's shares. Before the purchase that was revealed in four Form 4 filings on Oct. 3 with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Abel owned relatively few shares of the company for someone in his position. Until the purchases last week, Abel only owned about $2.7 million of stock or 2,363 of Class B shares and five Class A shares, according to the 2022 proxy statement filed this March.Abel bought 168 Berkshire Hathaway Class A shares through the Gregory Abel Revocable Trust on behalf of a family trust that includes his wife, children and other family members.He paid in a range of $405,000 to $408,000 per class A share for the Berkshire stock, which closed Monday at $413,300.Abel used the proceeds from selling his 1% stake in the company's Berkshire Hathaway Energy for $870 million to purchase these shares.Abel began his tenure first at MidAmerican Energy in 1992, becoming its CEO in 2008. Berkshire acquired the company in 1999 and changed its name to Berkshire Hathaway Energy.In 2018, Abel was promoted to become Berkshire's vice chairman overseeing its dozens of non-insurance businesses. He received $19 million in compensation for each of the past three years, which was set by Buffett.That amount was also awarded to Ajit Jain, a vice chairman who oversees the insurance businesses of the behemoth.Unlike other major public companies, Berkshire's executives do not receive stock compensation. Buffett, who has set the policy for the conglomerate's executives, believes that shares of his company are commodities.Berkshire's executives and directors all purchase the company's shares in the open market like retail investors.The timing of the stock purchase could be fortuitous since the company's shares have dropped by 8% so far in 2022, but are still beating the S&P 500, which has fallen by 22%. Shares of Berkshire have fallen by 24% from its March peak.In 2021, Buffett said publicly that Abel would succeed him. But Buffett, who is now 92, has not indicated when he might retire. Charlie Munger, the right hand man of Buffett who serves as a vice chairman, is 98.Buffett said that Jain would be next in line.“The directors are in agreement that if something were to happen to me tonight it would be Greg who’d take over tomorrow morning,” Buffett said. “If, heaven forbid, anything happened to Greg tonight then it would be Ajit. They’re both wonderful guys.”Warren Buffett's son, philanthropist Howard Buffett, 67, would likely take over his father's position on the board. Howard Buffett was been a board member of Berkshire since 1993 and would serve as non-executive chairman. Howard Buffett, who runs a charitable foundation and has worked as a farmer, was never in the running to take over Berkshire.Warren Buffett, along with Bill Gates, founder and former CEO of Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report, and Melinda Gates, were the founders of the Giving Pledge, a pact by several billionaires who commit to donating the majority of their massive wealth during their lifetime or in their wills.Warren Buffett still owns a 16% stake in Berkshire that is worth about $95 billion. He has already donated half his holdings during the past 16 years to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, plus other philanthropies.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article266823731.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Tech billionaires have lost a good share of their wealth in 2022.Silicon Valley founders and CEOs have had a rough year so far, losing billions of dollars in net worth.Technology company billionaires make up 6 of the top 10 biggest losers so far this year, with losses approaching a quarter of a trillion dollars for the group.Leading this dubious list is Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, now called Meta Platforms (META) - Get Meta Platforms Inc. Report. Zuckerberg is down by a massive $70.8 billion, or 56%, so far this year.But have no fears, he still ranks as the 20th richest billionaire as of Sept. 18, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Zuckerberg, who is only 38 years old, is still worth $54.7 billion, outranking Michael Dell of the namesake PC company and Changpen Zao, founder of Binance.com, the largest cryptocurrency trading platform in the world in terms of trading volume.Zuckerberg is not the only tech tycoon having a tough year. Jeff Bezos recently lost his title of the world's second richest man to Indian tycoon Gautam Adani.Bezos, the founder and executive chairman of tech and online-retail giant Amazon (AMZN) - Get Amazon.com Inc. Report fell to the number three spot at 10:38 a.m EST on Sept. 16.He had a fortune estimated at $145.8 billion compared with $146.9 billion for Adani who ended the day with a fortune of $147 billion.The day started with Adani at No. 3 and Bezos at No. 2.Meta has faced some challenges in 2022, similar to other tech companies. Shareholders have been impatient and the stock has fallen 56.4% year-to-date, losing $70.8 billion in valuation.The social media company that operates Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, is among companies that lost tens of billions of dollars in market cap during the trading week ending Sept. 16.A little over a year ago Facebook joined the prestigious club of companies worth at least $1 trillion with a market cap of $1.078 trillion set on Sept. 7, 2021. In July, Facebook announced its first quarterly revenue decline since going public in 2012.Competition from TikTok, the short video platform company, has been fierce and could be stealing market share from Facebook, which had 2.93 billion monthly active users as of June 30.TheStreet SmartsTheStreet’s Single Smartest Insight From The DayExclusive newsletter delivered to your inbox daily covering important investing topics pulled from TheStreet’s premium content.Cut Through The NoiseYour Personal Financial AdvisorInvesting Cheat SheetLearn moreThe economic slowdown and a probable recession also have pressured the company's bottom line, which is supported by advertising.Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, signed the Giving Pledge in 2015 to commit to donating the majority of their massive wealth, along with Bill Gates, founder and former CEO of Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report and Berkshire Hathaway's (BRK.A) - Get Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Report CEO Warren Buffett. The Giving Pledge was created by Buffett, Melinda French Gates and Bill Gates.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article266047096.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer speaks about what the company is planning next.With the video game industry on track to make $200 billion in 2022 and reach a worth $435 billion by 2028, it's no surprise that its biggest players are jocking for power.While the number one revenue slot still belongs to Chinese conglomerate Tencent (TCEHY) , Sony (SONY) - Get Sony Group Corporation American Depositary Shares Reportholds position #2 thanks to the $18.28 billion it raked in over the course of 2021.Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report came in at number four in 2021. But it's aggressively pushing for a higher ranking -- which is a large part of why it announced its intent to acquire video game publisher Activision Blizzard (ATVI) - Get Activision Blizzard Inc Report in 2022 for $68.7 billion. Activision Blizzard has a full slate of major name hits in the video game world, from the \"Call of Duty\" and \"Diablo\" franchises to \"Candy Crush Saga,\" which is gained ownership of when it purchased mobile developer King in 2016.However, the path to such a mammoth acquisition has been anything but easy. Activision Blizzard dealt with its own share of scandal in 2021, with CEO Bobby Kotick tangled up in allegations of sexual harassment and facing accusations of trying to ditch the company in the Microsoft sale to dodge liability. The harassment claims have since been settled.The Microsoft/Activision deal also went on pause after the U.K. Competition Authority, which initially launched a probe into the deal, moved its investigation into phase II.TheStreet's Martin Baccarat reports, \"They're very worried about the impact it would have on the broader competition conditions in not only the U.K. economy but around the world for video games. So, it not only increases the likelihood that Microsoft will have to make some remedies to make those watchdogs happy, but also that other competition authorities around the world will want to put their oar in the water on this deal before it closes next year as well.\"Now, Microsoft has made clear that it has no intentions of slowing down on its quest for glory (and well, money).Microsoft Intends to Keep Buying CompaniesMicrosoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer seems unphased by the potential slowdown of the Activision Blizzard acquisition, instead focusing on his future goals for the division.\"This is such a competitive market, I don't think we get to press pause on anything,\" Spencer said in an interview with CNBC. \"Tencent is the largest gaming company on the planet today and they continue to heavily invest in gaming content and game creators. Sony is a larger business than we are today and they continue to invest.\"While Spencer didn't get specific about what Microsoft may want to acquire next, he made it clear that his plan is to continue pushing the company forward.\"We strive to be a major player here. We want to deliver great content for our players. And we're going to remain active, whether that's investing in our internal teams that are already building great games that we know and love, whether its building new partnerships...the work for us never ends. I want to make sure Xbox is at the forefront of innovation and competition.\"Previously Microsoft has acquired an impressive list of game studios, including Mojang (\"Minecraft\"), 343 Industries (\"Halo\"), and ZeniMax Media (\"Fallout\").TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article265953896.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "The billionaire is the main key to the success of the manufacturer of premium electric vehicles.Elon Musk is undoubtedly the architect of Tesla's (TSLA) - Get Tesla Inc. Report success. Investors are acknowledging this by placing enormous faith in the electric vehicle maker whose promises of becoming a tech empire have made it the world's sixth most valuable company by market capitalization just behind Apple (AAPL) - Get Apple Inc. Report, Saudi Aramco, Microsoft (MSFT) - Get Microsoft Corporation Report, Alphabet (GOOGL) - Get Alphabet Inc. Report and Amazon (AMZN) - Get Amazon.com Inc. Report. Investors appear convinced that as long as Musk is in charge, Tesla will continue to disrupt the automotive industry and beyond technology. Any sign that the billionaire may be focusing his attention and energy less on Tesla is likely to send investors into serious fright. This is what happened in the past three months with the launch of a $44 billion takeover bid for microblogging website Twitter (TWTR) - Get Twitter Inc. Report by Musk. This offer was the start of a saga marked by twists, public clashes and now a legal battle after Musk withdrew his offer due, he claims, to Twitter's bad faith regarding the number of fake accounts, or spam bots, present on the platform. A five-day trial is scheduled for October unless the two sides reach a settlement by then.Investor concern can be seen in the decline of Tesla stock since the offer was first made. Shares have lost 27.4% of their value to $742.50 at the time of writing. On April 13, the date before Musk's offer, Tesla stock closed at $1,022.37. However, this drop is also part of a context of general decline in the markets, on growing fears of a recession.'I'm Committed'For investors and Tesla fans worried that the Twitter saga will distract the tech tycoon, Musk just sent a reassuring message \"Things obviously changed dramatically in the last three years, from near life or death to a company with consistent cash flow and industry leading margins. I'm wondering if you can comment on your personal role in the company and whether you see that changing in terms of your role and time spent at the company over the next three or four years,\" an analyst asked the billionaire during Tesla's second quarter earnings' call on July 20. \"I think you you said a couple of things [like] you wouldn't be on calls unless there's something unusual and you've been on every call since then.\"Musk responded, first humorously, then seriously.\"I have done a lot of unusual things, let's face it,\" the entrepreneur said. \"If there's only good news, I won't be on the call. But a tough situation like with shutdowns in China, then then I'll be on a call, relatively speaking [if] there's bad news.\"\"If all we have is good news then I won't be on the call,\" he smiled.Then he got serious again.\"I'm committed,\" Musk continued. \"I'll work [at]Tesla; I can usefully advance the cause of sustainability and autonomy.\"The company announced stronger-than-expected second-quarter earnings on July 20, although its profit margins narrowed amid surging input costs. Revenues rose 41% from last year to $16.94 billion. Gross automotive margins were 27.9%, a 500 basis point decline from last year.TheStreet, Inc. All rights reserved. Action Alerts PLUS is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.mcclatchy-wires.com/incoming/article263676838.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "New York, NY ( STL.News ) MSCI Inc. (NYSE: MSCI), a leading provider of critical decision support tools and services for the global investment community, announced today that Rajat Taneja , President of Technology for Visa Inc., has been appointed to serve as an independent director on MSCI’s Board of Directors (the “Board”), effective June 1, 2021. Mr. Taneja will serve as a member of the Audit Committee of the Board. Following the appointment of Mr. Taneja, the Board will be comprised of 10 directors. “I am pleased to welcome Rajat to the MSCI Board,” said Henry A. Fernandez, MSCI’s Chairman, and Chief Executive Officer. “Rajat has 30 years of global technology, innovation, and research and development experience, and I am confident that he will provide invaluable insight into the continuing transformation of MSCI’s data and technology capabilities as we seek to increasingly leverage cutting edge data processing technologies, democratize the data points underlying our solutions and deliver enhanced user experiences, ” added Mr. Fernandez. “This is an exciting time to join the MSCI Board, and I look forward to working with my fellow board members and advising MSCI’s management team on the next evolution of MSCI’s data and technology strategy,” said Mr. Taneja. “I welcome the opportunity to contribute to MSCI’s future growth and to help MSCI pursue its mission of empowering its clients to build better portfolios for a better world,” added Mr. Taneja. Mr. Taneja, age 56, has held the role of President of Technology for Visa Inc. (“Visa”) since September 2019. He joined Visa in November 2013 and served as Executive Vice President of Technology and Operations until August 2019. Before joining Visa, Mr. Taneja was Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer of Electronic Arts Inc. from October 2011 until November 2013. From August 1996 until October 2011, he served in various roles at Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”), including as the Corporate Vice President, Commerce Division. At Microsoft, Mr. Taneja led the development and deployment of commerce and transaction technologies across its connected services, its online digital advertising platforms, and its first business online service offering. Mr. Taneja served on the board of directors of Ellie Mae from June 2015 until April 2019, including its Technology and Cybersecurity Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Mr. Taneja holds a Bachelor of Engineering from Jadavpur University and a Master of Business Administration from Washington State University. Post Views: 208",
"URL": "https://www.stl.news/rajat-taneja-appointed-to-msci-inc-board-of-directors/449247/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "The top iPhone and iPad apps on App StoreThe top iPhone and iPad apps on App StoreBy The Associated PressMarch 31, 2020, 4:11 PM2 min read2 min readShare to FacebookShare to TwitterEmail this article The top iPhone and iPad apps on App Store for week ending March 29th Top Paid iPhone Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 3. TouchRetouch, ADVA Soft GmbH 4. Procreate Pocket, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 5. The Game of Life, Marmalade Game Studio 6. Exploding Kittens, Exploding Kittens 7. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi 8. Grand Theft Auto: San Andrea,s Rockstar Games 9. Geometry Dash, RobTop Games AB 10. Papa's Freezeria To Go!, Flipline Studios Top Free iPhone Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings, Zoom 2. TikTok - Make Your Day, TikTok Inc. 3. Hangouts Meet by Google, Google LLC 4. Houseparty, Life On Air, Inc 5. Google Classroom, Google LLC 6. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 7. Microsoft Teams, Microsoft Corporation 8. Home Restoration, Panteon 9. Pizzaiolo!, Geisha Tokyo Inc. 10. Save The Girl!, Lion Studios Top Paid iPad Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Procreate, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 3. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 4. GoodNotes 5, Time Base Technology Limited 5. Notability, Ginger Labs 6. Teach Your Monster to Read, Teach Monster Games Ltd. 7. XtraMath, XtraMath 8. Duet Display, Duet, Inc. 9. The Game of Life, Marmalade Game Studio 10. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi Top Free iPad Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings, Zoom 2. Google Classroom, Google LLC 3. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 4. Hangouts Meet by Google, Google LLC 5. Wheel Smash, Rollic Games 6. Blend It, 3D SayGames LLC 7. Google Chrome, Google LLC 8. ABCmouse.com, Age of Learning, Inc. 9. Messenger Kids, Facebook, Inc. 10. Save The Girl!, Lion StudiosComments (0)Share to FacebookShare to TwitterEmail this article The top iPhone and iPad apps on App Store for week ending March 29th Top Paid iPhone Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 3. TouchRetouch, ADVA Soft GmbH 4. Procreate Pocket, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 5. The Game of Life, Marmalade Game Studio 6. Exploding Kittens, Exploding Kittens 7. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi 8. Grand Theft Auto: San Andrea,s Rockstar Games 9. Geometry Dash, RobTop Games AB 10. Papa's Freezeria To Go!, Flipline Studios Top Free iPhone Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings, Zoom 2. TikTok - Make Your Day, TikTok Inc. 3. Hangouts Meet by Google, Google LLC 4. Houseparty, Life On Air, Inc 5. Google Classroom, Google LLC 6. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 7. Microsoft Teams, Microsoft Corporation 8. Home Restoration, Panteon 9. Pizzaiolo!, Geisha Tokyo Inc. 10. Save The Girl!, Lion Studios Top Paid iPad Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Procreate, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 3. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 4. GoodNotes 5, Time Base Technology Limited 5. Notability, Ginger Labs 6. Teach Your Monster to Read, Teach Monster Games Ltd. 7. XtraMath, XtraMath 8. Duet Display, Duet, Inc. 9. The Game of Life, Marmalade Game Studio 10. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi Top Free iPad Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings, Zoom 2. Google Classroom, Google LLC 3. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 4. Hangouts Meet by Google, Google LLC 5. Wheel Smash, Rollic Games 6. Blend It, 3D SayGames LLC 7. Google Chrome, Google LLC 8. ABCmouse.com, Age of Learning, Inc. 9. Messenger Kids, Facebook, Inc. 10. Save The Girl!, Lion Studios ",
"URL": "https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/top-iphone-ipad-apps-app-store-69898275"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "The top iPhone and iPad apps on App StoreThe top iPhone and iPad apps on App StoreBy The Associated PressMarch 24, 2020, 4:12 PM2 min read The top iPhone and iPad apps on App store week ending March 3rd Top Paid iPhone Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Heads Up!, Warner Bros. 3. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 4. Procreate Pocket, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 5. TouchRetouch, ADVA Soft GmbH 6. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi 7. Geometry Dash, RobTop Games AB 8. NBA 2K20, 2K 9. The Game of Life, Marmalade Game Studio 10. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, Rockstar Games Top Free iPhone Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings, Zoom 2. TikTok - Make Your Day, TikTok Inc. 3. Google Classroom, Google LLC 4. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 5. Ultimate Disc, SUPERSONICS STUDIOS LTD 6. Hangouts Meet by Google, Google LLC 7. Spiral Roll, Voodoo 8. Brain Test: Tricky Puzzles, Unico Studio LLC 9. Microsoft Teams, Microsoft Corporation 10 .Disney+, Disney Top Paid iPad Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Procreate, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 3. GoodNotes 5, Time Base Technology Limited 4. Notability, Ginger Labs 5. XtraMath, XtraMath 6. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 7. Duet Display, Duet, Inc. 8. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi 9. Geometry Dash, RobTop Games AB 10. Vizref, Studio Pixanoh Top Free iPad Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings ,Zoom 2. Google Classroom, Google LLC 3. ABCmouse.com, Age of Learning, Inc. 4. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 5. Disney+, Disney 6. Epic! - Kids’ Books and Videos, Epic Creations, Inc. 7. Spiral Roll, Voodoo 8. Google Chrome, Google LLC 9. Seesaw: The Learning Journal, Seesaw Learning, Inc. 10. Ultimate Disc, SUPERSONICS STUDIOS LTDComments (0) The top iPhone and iPad apps on App store week ending March 3rd Top Paid iPhone Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Heads Up!, Warner Bros. 3. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 4. Procreate Pocket, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 5. TouchRetouch, ADVA Soft GmbH 6. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi 7. Geometry Dash, RobTop Games AB 8. NBA 2K20, 2K 9. The Game of Life, Marmalade Game Studio 10. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, Rockstar Games Top Free iPhone Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings, Zoom 2. TikTok - Make Your Day, TikTok Inc. 3. Google Classroom, Google LLC 4. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 5. Ultimate Disc, SUPERSONICS STUDIOS LTD 6. Hangouts Meet by Google, Google LLC 7. Spiral Roll, Voodoo 8. Brain Test: Tricky Puzzles, Unico Studio LLC 9. Microsoft Teams, Microsoft Corporation 10 .Disney+, Disney Top Paid iPad Apps: 1. Minecraft, Mojang 2. Procreate, Savage Interactive Pty Ltd 3. GoodNotes 5, Time Base Technology Limited 4. Notability, Ginger Labs 5. XtraMath, XtraMath 6. Monopoly, Marmalade Game Studio 7. Duet Display, Duet, Inc. 8. Bloons TD 6, Ninja Kiwi 9. Geometry Dash, RobTop Games AB 10. Vizref, Studio Pixanoh Top Free iPad Apps: 1. ZOOM Cloud Meetings ,Zoom 2. Google Classroom, Google LLC 3. ABCmouse.com, Age of Learning, Inc. 4. Perfect Cream, Playgendary Limited 5. Disney+, Disney 6. Epic! - Kids’ Books and Videos, Epic Creations, Inc. 7. Spiral Roll, Voodoo 8. Google Chrome, Google LLC 9. Seesaw: The Learning Journal, Seesaw Learning, Inc. 10. Ultimate Disc, SUPERSONICS STUDIOS LTD ",
"URL": "https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/top-iphone-ipad-apps-app-store-69771201"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Publish Date November 29, 2019 Dexphot malware uses fileless techniques to install cryptominer Bradley Barth Follow @bbb1216bbb Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Print Share by Email Microsoft Corporation yesterday revealed its discovery of a polymorphic malware that uses fileless techniques to execute a cryptomining program on victimized machines. Dubbed Dexphot, the malware was first observed in October 2018 when Microsoft detected a campaign that “attempted to deploy files that changed every 20 to 30 minutes on thousands of devices,” according to a blog post published yesterday by the Microsoft Defender ATP Research Team. At one point, on June 18, Microsoft saw reports of Dexphot-related malicious behavior in close to 80,000 machines, though that number dropped to under 10,000 by July 19. Dexphot sports a complex attack chain that relies largely on legitimate processes (aka living off the land) to ultimately execute the payload. According to Microsoft, the process chain involves five files: an installer with two URLs, an MSI package file, a password-protected ZIP archive, a loader DLL, and an encrypted data file with three executables. These executables are loaded via process hollowing, a fileless technique that involves replacing the contents of a legitimate system process with malicious code. According to Microsoft, Dexphot typically uses SoftwareBundler:Win32/ICLoader and its variants as an early-stage loader to drop and run the Dexphot installer. Additionally, the malware abuses msiexec.exe to install the MSI package file; unzip.exe to extract files from the ZIP archive; rundll32.exe for loading the loader DLL; and svchost.exe, tracert.exe and setup.exe for process hollowing. Other abused legit processes include schtasks.exe and powershell.exe. The malware is polymorphic in a number of ways, Microsoft explains. The aforementioned MSI package can contain a varying mix of files, file names can differ, the passwords for extracting files can change, and the contents of each loader DLL can vary, as can the data found in the ZIP file. “Because of these carefully designed layers of polymorphism, a traditional file-based detection approach wouldn’t be effective against Dexphot,” Microsoft states in its blog post. Often, but not always, the MSI package contains an obfuscated batch file that checks for antivirus products, for an additional defense against detection. To generate persistence, Dexphot relies on a pair of monitoring services — installed as executables during the process hollowing phase of the infection chain — to ensure that the malware is running smoothly. If any of Dexphot’s processes have been halted, the monitors force a re-infection via a PowerShell command. Dexphot also gains an additional layer of persistence by using schtasks.exe to set up scheduled tasks that routinely update the malware components. “Dexphot is not the type of attack that generates mainstream media attention; it’s one of the countless malware campaigns that are active at any given time,” Microsoft concludes in its report. “Its goal is a very common one in cybercriminal circles – to install a coin miner that silently steals computer resources and generates revenue for the attackers – yet Dexphot exemplifies the level of complexity and rate of evolution of even everyday threats, intent on evading protections and motivated to fly under the radar for the prospect of profit. Topics: Cryptocurrency Malware You must be a registered member of SC Media to post a comment Please register or login first to post a comment. Login Register Leave a Reply Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment. Stantinko botnet’s monetization strategy shifts to cryptomining ",
"URL": "https://www.scmagazine.com/home/security-news/dexphot-malware-uses-fileless-techniques-to-install-cryptominer/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Publish Date July 18, 2019 Microsoft demos vote verification tool, warns of ongoing foreign meddling Bradley Barth Follow @bbb1216bbb Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Print Share by Email Microsoft Corporation yesterday began publicly demonstrating its free and open-source secure electronic voting solution, ElectionGuard, warning that such innovations are necessary as adversarial nations continue to target the American people and U.S. businesses. In a blog post announcing the demo, Microsoft Corporate Vice President of Customer Security and Trust Tom Burt said that in the past year alone, the company has notified close to 10,000 customers that the were the target of a nation-state-sponsored cyberattack. About 84 percent of these attacks targeted enterprise customers, while the remainder were aimed at consumers’ personal email accounts. Iran, North Korea and Russia were the main sources of this malicious activity, Burt added. Burt also said since its August 2018 debut, AccountGuard, Microsoft’s threat notification service for political campaigns, parties, and democracy-focused NGOs, has issued 781 notices to organizations, warning that they were targeted by nation-state attackers. Although the service has been extended to 26 countries, 95 percent of these attacks targeted U.S.-based entities. Microsoft’s ElectionGuard product will be available in software development kit form via GitHub later this summer. The solution assigns an encryption-enabled verification mechanism that distributes unique tracking codes to voters, which they can later enter into a website to independently confirm that their votes were counted and not altered. Burt said that the demo, which is taking place at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado, “will show how ElectionGuard can enable end-to-end verifiable elections for the first time while retaining the familiarity and certainty of paper ballots. The demo will provide voters with a printed record of their votes, which they can check and place into a physical ballot box, with verification through the web portal serving as a supplemental layer of security and verifiability.” Burt said that multiple election technology suppliers – collectively responsible for building and selling more than half of the voting systems in the U.S. – are partnering with Microsoft to incorporate its technology into their systems. The company is also working with Columbia University’s Columbia World Projects initiative to pilot the technology in the 2020 elections. Topics: APT Cyber Espionage Election Coverage Network Security Recommended For You You must be a registered member of SC Media to post a comment Please register or login first to post a comment. Login Register Mirai malware sets sights on enterprise IoT devices ripe for picking ",
"URL": "https://www.scmagazine.com/home/security-news/microsoft-demos-vote-verification-tool-warns-of-ongoing-foreign-meddling/"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Using dividend-paying stocks as the backbone of a diversified portfolio Opens a New Window. is a wonderful thing. However, those new to investing might have some questions about dividends. But knowing what a dividend is and how dividends work is only half the battle, since knowing how to make the best use of dividends can set you on the path to true financial freedom. Here's a dividend investing guide that will provide you with a basic understanding of what dividends are and help you create your own dividend portfolio strategy. What is a dividend? Continue Reading Below A stock investment is, at its core, a claim on the long-term stream of cash flows generated by a business, or the money generated by the business. There are different ways to benefit from these cash flows, with the two main sources being an increase in stock prices due to growth in the business, referred to as capital appreciation, and cash distributions funded by the ongoing cash flows the business generates. Dividends are a form of cash distribution and represent a tangible return that you can then use for other purposes. A dividend-paying company is, essentially, writing a check to its shareholders out of the profits it generates. For investors who use a broker, which is most investors, that check will simply be a deposit that shows up on your brokerage statement. Dividends are generally paid to shareholders at regular intervals, with quarterly being the most frequent timing in the United States. However, dividends can also be paid monthly, semiannually, annually, and even on a one-off basis, in the case of \"special\" dividends. (There's more information on the frequency topic below.) To help with the processing of dividends, there are a few key dates to watch, most notably the ex-dividend date, which is the first trading day on which a future dividend payment isn't included in a stock's price. After the ex-dividend date, a stock trades as if it has already paid the dividend. If you buy the stock before that date, you get the dividend. If you buy the stock after the ex-dividend date, you don't receive the dividend. This all may sound a little complicated right now, but after spending a little time understanding dividends, you'll see that they're pretty easy to get your head around. Despite their simplicity, however, they can have a huge impact on your financial life. A real-world example will probably help here. ExxonMobil Corporation (NYSE: XOM) pays quarterly dividends in March, June, September, and December. Between January 1 of 2009 and December 31 of 2018, the company's stock fell roughly 15%. But investors who took those quarterly dividends and bought more Exxon stock (known as reinvesting) would have achieved a gain over the 10-year span of 15%. This is because they were buying stock all along, increasing their investment with the dividends they received. Are dividends a good thing? Advertisement For some investors, dividends are great...for others, dividends are a nuisance. In the end, whether you think dividends are good or bad will really depend on your investment approach and temperament. For example, some investors use their dividends to supplement their Social Security Opens a New Window. check during retirement. Such investors love dividends. Other investors, those who wish to avoid taxes or who are still building a nest egg, might prefer to see a company reinvest all of its cash into the business to spur higher levels of growth. Investors like that might deem dividends a waste of cash. Some investors might also prefer to see cash used to buy back stock Opens a New Window. instead of pay dividends. Buying back stock is another way in which companies can return cash to shareholders without actually distributing the money to shareholders. The ownership interest in a company is spread across the total number of shares a company issues. By reducing the number of shares outstanding via a buyback, the company gets to spread earnings over a smaller share base Opens a New Window. . So every share is awarded a larger piece of the company's earnings, which, in turn, increases earnings-per-share growth. Since earnings are a key metric by which company success is graded by investors, higher earnings generally lead to higher share prices. Some companies like to use share buybacks because they don't actually have to complete buybacks even if they announce them. This provides more flexibility in case the business environment changes. Investors tend to react poorly if dividend payments are reduced even if a company is facing hard times. How are dividends decided? At the most basic level, the chief executive officer Opens a New Window. of a company makes a recommendation to the board of directors Opens a New Window. on what he or she believes is an appropriate dividend policy. Often there is no specific public policy to go off of, just the dividend history. But some companies do make public their dividend goals. For example, some companies target a percentage of earnings or cash flow. Brookfield Renewable Partners , for example, targets 70% of distributable cash flow, a non-GAAP measure that shows how much cash it could pay if it wanted to. That said, the intent is to keep growing the dividend along with the partnership's growth, so it will hover around that target over time. You should check to see if a company has a stated policy, but often you'll be stuck with nothing more than the history. It's important to note that the CEO isn't the one making the final call here; the board of directors is. This collection of individuals comprises the elected representatives of the shareholders. They are effectively the boss of the CEO and have the final say on key issues, including how a company's profits should be used. Dividends are a big piece of that story. So the board takes the CEO's advice, discusses it, and votes on what it believes the dividend should be. The types of issues a board might look at include, but are not limited to, the company's profitability, available cash, leverage, and future capital needs. A key issue to keep in mind here is that while a company's earnings are an important consideration in this process, dividends actually come out of cash flow. Earnings are an accounting measure dictated by a standard set of rules that try to tie revenues and earnings to specific time periods. Cash going in and out of the company, or cash flow, doesn't work the same way. For example, a big capital investment like a truck will be paid for when it is bought, reducing the cash a company has the day it is acquired. But for earnings purposes, the cost will get spread across the useful life of the truck, since it is getting used a little bit each quarter. This is called depreciation, and it has no impact on cash flow, but it can be a notable issue for earnings. Since dividends are paid out of and impact a company's cash, with little to no impact on earnings, the cash flow statement Opens a New Window. is where dividend payments are reflected. This statement actually tracks the cash that is going in and out of the company during a set period of time. Going back to the truck example above, a company's earnings may be lowered by depreciation expenses for that expense for years, but the cash going in and out of the company won't be impacted because the money was already spent. So the cash a company has available may actually be more in a given period than the earnings a company reports. This helps explain how a company can pay more in dividends than it earns, since noncash charges, like depreciation, can lower earnings while having little to no impact on the cash a business is generating. At the end of the day, the cash flow statement is closer to how you might look at your own finances. While the earnings statement is important, the cash flow statement is the best way to see if a company can actually afford the dividend it is paying. Some key dividend dates There are some important processing issues involved when it comes to dividends, largely related to timing. The first is the declaration date, which is when a company announces its dividend plans to the market. In this statement, in addition to the actual dividend amount, it will report the record date, the ex-date, and the payment date Opens a New Window. . To understand this process, it may help to look at a real-life example. On October 31, 2018, ExxonMobil put out a news release informing investors and the public about its intention to pay a fourth-quarter dividend of $0.82 per share. That news release was the declaration of the dividend. In addition to the amount, the company also reported that the dividend would be paid on December 10 to shareholders of record as of November 13. The payment date is the day on which shareholders will receive the dividend. The record date is effectively the day the company makes the list of all of its shareholders. The only date that wasn't included in the release was the ex-dividend date, which is generally two business days prior to the record date to account for the time needed to clear stock transactions. (In this case, the ex-dividend date was November 9 because of a weekend.) This date was not in the press release but was reported on the company's website. Purchase the stock on or prior to that date and you will be eligible for the dividend; buy after the record date and the previous owner will get the dividend. In effect, the ex-date is the specific date on which the stock will trade without the dividend included in the price. For most investors, particularly those with a long-term view, these dates will not be too big an issue. However, if you are looking to buy a stock, you might want to double-check the dates just in case. You'd rather get a dividend than miss it by a day or two because you procrastinated. Some investors, meanwhile, try to capture dividends by investing around these dates. Dividend capturing is a strategy Opens a New Window. in which investors only hold stocks long enough to receive the disbursement before moving on to another stock. In this way, the investor can invest in many dividend stocks with the same money and \"capture\" more dividends. Although this sounds like a great idea, it is complicated and time consuming. There's another technicality that complicates the dividend capture approach: Dividends are technically a return of retained earnings Opens a New Window. (a balance sheet Opens a New Window. item). As such, the stock price logically should fall by the amount of the dividend once it hits the ex-dividend date. There's also the risk that the stock price could be moved by company news or events in the broader market during the holding period. So you will generate income from the dividend you collect, but you could end up with an offsetting capital loss when you sell the shares. It's very possible that the net benefit will be less than you might hope, and thus, most investors shouldn't get involved with dividend capturing. Some key dividend metrics Now that you've got the important dates to keep in mind, you'll want to understand some of the key metrics you'll see when researching dividend stocks. The most prominent is the dividend yield Opens a New Window. . This is generated by taking the most recent dividend payment and multiplying it by the dividend frequency (how many times a year the dividend is paid) and then dividing by the current stock price. The higher the yield the better for most income investors, but only up to a point. Abnormally high yields can indicate heightened levels of risk. A good reference point for investors is to compare a stock's yield to that of the S&P 500 Index to get a sense of whether it is high or low, since market conditions can change over time. Yields should also be compared to those of direct peers to get a sense of how high or low a yield is, since some industries tend to offer higher yields than others. Note that some data services will provide a trailing dividend yield, which takes historical dividends that were paid (usually over the last 12 months) instead of looking at the current dividend and multiplying by the frequency. Another metric that investors focus on is the payout ratio Opens a New Window. . This can be derived by taking the dividend and dividing by the company's earnings per share. Although dividends don't get paid out of earnings, this gives an idea of how easily a company can afford its dividend. The lower the payout ratio the better, with ratios over 100% worthy of additional research (noting that some industries, such as real estate investment trusts, almost always have payout ratios over 100% because of heavy depreciation expenses). This figure can be calculated over different time periods, but it is usually looked at quarterly, over the trailing 12 months, or annually. Some investors will also look at yield on purchase price. You calculate yield on purchase price by taking the current dividend per share and dividing it by your average cost per share. This is a number that is, obviously, specific to each individual investor. It is most appropriate for investors who have owned a dividend-paying stock for a very long time and for those who have used dollar-cost averaging to create their position. For example, if you had purchased Microsoft Corporation on the first business day of 1995 for $26.95 (the highest price on that day), the dividend was a scant $0.32 per share per year, providing investors with a roughly 1.2% dividend yield. By the end of 2018, the dividend had grown to $1.68 per share per year. That's a yield on purchase price of 6.2%! How often are dividends paid? Dividend yield and the payout ratio bring an element of time into the dividend discussion. In the United States, most companies pay four dividends a year, or one each quarter. That, however, is just one option. Some companies, like Realty Income , a real estate investment trust Opens a New Window. , pay dividends monthly. (There aren't too many monthly dividend stocks, which is a shame, since the dividend checks from these companies end up closely mimicking a regular paycheck, thus simplifying the budgeting process for investors.) Others pay twice a year, or semiannually. An example here would be Disney , which pays in January and July. Many European companies, meanwhile, only pay two times a year, with one small interim payment followed by a larger \"final\" payment. Most U.S. companies pay the same amount each time. Some companies only pay one time a year, such as Cintas , which tends to wait until near calendar year-end to pay its annual dividend. To properly figure out the dividend yield and payout ratios of these companies, you need to take the dividend frequency into consideration. Note that some data services don't get this step right, leading to erroneous data. So you should always go to a company's website to double-check any dividend statistic that seems unusual. There's one more thing to keep in mind here as well. Sometimes companies pay special dividends Opens a New Window. . These are payments that are made outside of their typical dividend schedule. An example is Kinder Morgan Canada , which sold a large asset in 2018 Opens a New Window. and chose to distribute a portion of the cash it generated to shareholders via a one-time distribution. Such dividends shouldn't be considered in the yield or payout ratio, since they are unusual events. That said, some companies have a history of paying special dividends on a regular basis, like L Brands , though it hasn't done so lately, showing that such extra payments shouldn't be relied on. Not all dividends are paid in cash To complicate things even more, dividends aren't always paid in cash. Sometimes a company pays a stock dividend, through which it issues each investor additional shares of the company. One great example is Tootsie Roll Industries , which has a very small cash dividend but also generally pays out a small stock dividend each year. The net benefit for investors is that the number of shares they own increases over time. Other times, a spin-off is effected via a stock dividend in a new company. This happens when a company gives shareholders freshly created shares in one of its operating divisions so that it can break the division off as its own public company. One of the classic examples of this was the 1984 breakup of AT&T , lovingly referred to as Ma Bell, into a long-distance company of the same name and seven so-called Baby Bells. The Baby Bells owned the local telephone companies serving various regions of the United States. For every 10 shares of AT&T, investors received one share in each of the seven regional phone companies. This move broke AT&T from one company into eight. All of that said, stock dividends are generally not the norm, though a small number of companies do have long histories of paying regular stock dividends. What's a dividend cut? So far so good, but dividends don't always go up. Sometimes when a company is facing financial trouble, it has to cut its dividend. Investors usually don't like dividend cuts, as noted above, and will sell companies that cut or that they believe are likely to cut. This is why you need to use caution when looking at companies with high yields and high payout ratios, as both could be a sign that the current dividend isn't sustainable. That said, some companies have variable dividends, so their dividends are expected to go up and down over time. Dividend changes at companies like this have to be looked at differently because the dividend policy is often more important than the dividend payment. Wheaton Precious Metals is a good example here. The company targets 30% of the average cash generated by operating activities over the previous four quarters. And it pays out exactly that amount, regardless of whether it is more or less than the previous dividend. This is noteworthy because Wheaton generates revenue by selling precious metals, the prices of which can be volatile. What is a DRIP? An acronym you'll frequently hear associated with dividends is DRIP Opens a New Window. , which stands for dividend reinvestment plan. Many companies allow you to buy stock from them directly and then use the dividends to automatically buy additional shares over time. Sometimes companies offer incentives for this, such as slightly-below-market reinvestment prices, and usually these transactions will not incur brokerage trading fees. A few companies require that you buy stock from a third party and then transfer the shares to the company's plan. The big deal here, however, is that you are using the dividend to buy more shares. That's basically dollar-cost averaging Opens a New Window. , or spreading your purchases over time. This is a service that many brokerages offer for free today (without the incentive of below-market prices). So you can often do the same thing without the need to open and monitor multiple accounts with different companies, which is what you would be left with if you enrolled in multiple company-sponsored DRIP plans. If you like to keep your life as simple as possible, ask your broker if it offers free dividend reinvestment. What are Dividend Kings, Aristocrats, Champions, Challengers, and Contenders? Dividend investing is a big thing, and investors have taken to using shorthand terms to describe dividend companies. Kings, Aristocrats Opens a New Window. , Champions, Challengers, and Contenders are some of the \"in the know\" terms you'll want to be fluent with. Each represents a different streak of annual dividend hikes: All of these terms are associated with longtime dividend payers. Some are formal lists that are maintained by companies like Standard & Poor's (and used to create investment products like exchange-traded funds, or ETFs Opens a New Window. ), while others are informal lists maintained by volunteers and available for free at websites like The DRiP Investing Resource Center Opens a New Window. . Lists such as these are a great starting point when looking for dividend stocks, since companies with a long history of increasing dividends have proven that they place a high value on rewarding investors. What is a dividend trap? A dividend trap is yet another term you'll hear to describe a dividend stock, only this one isn't positive at all. Essentially, a dividend trap is a stock with a high yield backed by a dividend that looks unsustainable. A good example here is rural telecom Opens a New Window. Frontier Communications (NASDAQ: FTR). In 2017, the company paid four quarterly dividends of $0.60 per share despite the fact that it was bleeding red ink the entire time. With no earnings, its dividend coverage ratio was actually negative. Its business had been struggling for some time under the weight of deteriorating financial results and a heavy debt load left behind from acquisitions. The company ended up eliminating the dividend in 2018. However, as 2017 progressed, the dividend yield went from around 10% or so to an unbelievable 50% as the stock plummeted from more than $50 per share to roughly $6.75. A yield of 10% is high and deserves extra attention, particularly at a highly leveraged money-losing company. But a yield of 50% is completely ridiculous -- the stock market was sending a very loud warning signal. Before you jump on a fat dividend yield, make sure you do a little digging to ensure that the high yield isn't a result of material financial troubles and, equally important, a high likelihood of a dividend cut. You want to do your best to avoid dividend traps like Frontier. Do dividends tell you anything about valuation? Often investors look at a price-to-earnings ratio Opens a New Window. to see if a stock is trading cheaply or richly. P/E is just price divided by earnings, much like a dividend yield is simply dividend payment divided by stock price. They are both relative measures. P/E tells you how much investors are willing to pay for each dollar a company earns, and dividend yield, roughly, tells you the level of income generation investors expect from a company over time. Truth be told, on their own, P/E and dividend yield don't tell you all that much about valuation. However, when you compare them to a company's own history or to a broader group (like an index or direct industry peers), you can start to see valuation patterns. For example, Hormel Foods ' (NYSE: HRL) dividend spiked above 2% in late 2017, toward the high end of the company's historical yield range. Its P/E at the time was around 19, having fallen from more than 30 in early 2016. Essentially, the dividend yield was telling a similar story to the P/E ratio. There are usually reasons why companies trade with low valuations; in this case, a shift in consumer buying habits toward fresh food over the prepackaged fare that dominated Hormel's portfolio had spooked Wall Street. But for long-term investors, a high relative dividend yield can be a buying opportunity. Hormel, for reference, started to shift its business mix via acquisitions that augmented its scale in fresh categories, notably including the deli aisle. By the end of 2018, Hormel's yield was roughly 1.8% and the P/E was back up to around 22. Dividend taxes: Uncle Sam gets his due No discussion of dividends would be complete without mentioning taxes. The government wants to get its due of these payments. You will receive tax forms from your broker or DRIP plan that outline what dividends you have received in a given year, and that information must be included in your income when you do taxes. That said, tax laws change over time, so the tax rate you'll pay on dividend income will vary. Dividends often receive preferential tax treatment. All dividends, meanwhile, are not created equal. Opens a New Window. Some companies include return of capital in their dividends. Opens a New Window. Such dividends are considered a return of a portion of your original investment and don't get taxed when you receive them. They reduce your cost basis when you sell, thus increasing your capital gains Opens a New Window. (which is the difference between what you paid for an investment and what you sold it for, assuming you made a profit on the transaction). Other companies, notably real estate investment trusts, are structured as pass-through entities because they pass much of their income to investors in exchange for avoiding corporate-level taxation. Most if not all of the dividends they pay are treated as regular income -- just like your salary. These types of dividends are often referred to as unqualified. Qualified dividends, meanwhile, are the norm. This type of dividend is paid by most U.S. companies and gets taxed at special rates. As an example, in 2018, qualified dividends paid to a couple filing jointly with earnings less than $77,200 a year don't get taxed at all. Such a couple making less than $479,000 but more than $77,200 would see their dividends taxed at a 15% rate. And a couple making more than $479,000 a year would see a dividend tax rate of 20%. Taxes are a complex topic, and you should consult an accountant for an in-depth discussion here. But rest assured that you need to let Uncle Sam know about your dividends, or the IRS will be sure to hunt you down and extract its pound of flesh. That said, there's a workaround on the tax front if you really don't want to pay taxes on your dividends: a Roth IRA. Like taxes, retirement accounts are complex, and a full discussion is beyond the scope of this article. But a Roth IRA is funded with money on which you have already paid taxes, and distributions in retirement are tax free. So if you put dividend stocks into a Roth IRA, you would, effectively, be generating tax-free income. This is not the case for a traditional IRA, which is funded with pre-tax earnings...in this case, every penny you pull out is taxed as income. If the idea of using a Roth IRA to generate tax-free income sounds enticing, it's probably worth taking the time to talk to your accountant. 10 stocks we like better than ExxonMobil When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor , has quadrupled the market.* David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the ten best stocks Opens a New Window. for investors to buy right now… and ExxonMobil wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys. See the 10 stocks Opens a New Window. *Stock Advisor returns as of March 1, 2019 Teresa Kersten, an employee of LinkedIn, a Microsoft subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool’s board of directors. Reuben Gregg Brewer Opens a New Window. owns shares of ExxonMobil and Hormel Foods. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Walt Disney. The Motley Fool owns shares of Microsoft. The Motley Fool recommends Cintas. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy Opens a New Window. .",
"URL": "https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/your-definitive-dividend-investing-guide"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Microsoft cloud push powers ongoing growth By The Associated Press REDMOND, Wash. — Jan 30, 2019, 6:03 PM ET 0 Shares Email Star The Associated PressFILE- In this Oct. 7, 2018, file photo a Microsoft Surface station is seen on the sidelines before an NFL football game between the Houston Texans and the Dallas Cowboys in Houston. Microsoft Corporation reports earnings Wednesday, Jan. 30, 2019. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip, File) 0 Shares Email Microsoft's ongoing growth as a provider of cloud computing services helped drive its fiscal second-quarter net income of $8.42 billion, an improvement after a loss in the same period a year earlier. The Redmond, Washington-based company said Wednesday it had profit of $1.08 per share. Earnings, adjusted for pretax expenses, were $1.10 per share. Shares dipped almost 1.5 percent in after-hours trading. Revenue from the company's flagship Azure cloud computing platform grew 76 percent. But the company saw a 5 percent revenue hit in Windows software supplied to other PC manufacturers. It attributed the decline in part to a short supply of Intel chips late last year. Microsoft's results topped Wall Street expectations. The average estimate of 14 analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment Research was for earnings of $1.09 per share. The software maker posted revenue of $32.47 billion in the period, which also topped Street forecasts. Twelve analysts surveyed by Zacks expected $32.45 billion. Microsoft shares have risen slightly more than 4 percent since the beginning of the year, while the Standard & Poor's 500 index has risen almost 7 percent. In the final minutes of trading on Wednesday, shares hit $105.97, an increase of 14 percent in the last 12 months. ————— Parts of this story were generated by Automated Insights (http://automatedinsights.com/ap) using data from Zacks Investment Research. Access a Zacks stock report on MSFT at https://www.zacks.com/ap/MSFT 0 Shares Email Star Comments Add Interests Customize your news feed by choosing the topics that interest you. To save your interests across all devices Log In or Sign Up » Add Interests Customize your news feed by choosing the topics that interest you. To save your interests across all devices Log In or Sign Up » Microsoft cloud push powers ongoing growth How a high school student 'stumbled upon' Apple's FaceTime bug and tried to report it Computers may one day recognize voices as well as humans Apple disables Group FaceTime after bug allows iPhone users to listen in before call Samsung quarterly operating profit fell on slower demand Reboot: Tonga hopes to restore internet access by weekend Apple busts Facebook for distributing data-sucking app The Latest: Nevada looking at legal options for plutonium Patients in Northwest measles outbreak traveled to Hawaii Tesla posts small 4Q profit, expects to make money this year Airbus says its data was hacked, no risk to commercial jets Facebook reports robust profit, revenue gains; stock rises At least 8 dead in dangerous, paralyzing cold blast Border security talks begin with no sign of compromise to avert a government shutdown Ban government shutdowns? Some Republicans and Democrats want to make it the law Fact Check: Trump's tales of duct-taped women and prayer rugs at US-Mexico border Congressional Republicans question FBI tactics used on Roger Stone Medicare-for-all fight reveals early fissures in 2020 Democratic primary Who is Stacey Abrams, the Democrat who will respond to Trump's State of the Union? Author of new book on Democratic fractures: Biden 'sensitive' to Warren's criticism Border security talks begin as Congress grapples with scope of negotiations What is the Federal Reserve? Barr confirmation vote delayed after Democrats raise Mueller report concerns Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti passes on 2020 presidential bid Senior lawmakers from both parties target rising drug prices in hearings Welcome to 2020: Obstacles for Trump and a wide-open Democratic race, poll finds Bolton stokes questions, confusion with '5,000 troops' note during Venezuela briefing ",
"URL": "https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/microsoft-cloud-push-powers-ongoing-growth-60736079"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Facebook Inc. (NASDAQ:FB) appears to be paying attention to its impact on the environment, pledging that its new data center in Iowa will be 100 percent powered by wind energy. The company’s data center in Altoona is expected to go online in early 2015, and it will be powered entirely by a wind project in nearby Wellsburg, which Facebook helped to develop, according to Energy Manager Today , a trade publication. The wind project will add 138 megawatts of capacity to the grid in Iowa, more than what the data center is expected to consume annually in coming years. Facebook has said it wants the energy mix for its data centers worldwide to reach 25 percent clean and renewable energy by 2015. That commitment came after a two-year Greenpeace campaign , which saw 700,000 people demand that Facebook use clean energy, and not coal, to power its data centers. After Facebook relented, the campaign ended in December 2011. The company said in June that a planned data center in Sweden will be powered entirely by hydroelectric energy. Other tech companies pledging to better manage their energy needs include Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) and Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT). Google said in June it would power its next data center in Finland with wind energy, and Microsoft said in March that it had made its Dublin data center significantly more-energy efficient. The data center in Iowa will be Facebook’s fourth, according to a company blog post . Google has at least six data centers in the U.S.",
"URL": "https://www.ibtimes.com/facebooks-fb-renewable-energy-all-wind-power-data-center-iowa-1474432"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "I’ve been passionate about increasing women’s participation in computer science for more than 25 years. While the number of undergraduate women pursuing some STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) fields like biology and chemistry has steadily increased over the past couple of decades, women’s participation in computer science has actually been declining . Indeed, within the last 20 years, the percentage of undergraduate women who received computer science degrees plummeted by almost 40 percent. According to the National Science Foundation , in 1995, 29 percent of bachelor’s degrees in computer science were awarded to women; by 2012, the most recent year for which NSF data is available, only 18 percent of computer science undergraduates were women. The Computing Research Association (CRA) reports even lower numbers. CRA’s annual Taulbee Survey of over 100 major computer science departments in North America found that by the mid-2000s, the percentage of women graduating with computer science bachelor’s degrees averaged 14 percent. For me, this issue is both personal and global. Working to Remove Barriers I’m a mathematician and a computer scientist. Back when I was getting my PhD in math, there were very few women in my field. Despite receiving discouragement because of my gender, I worked hard. And I excelled. I went on to take up leadership roles in many places: IBM, University of British Columbia, Princeton and now Harvey Mudd. I’ve been the first woman in nearly all these positions. I know the struggles that can hinder women when they are working in a predominantly male field . I also know firsthand how computer science and technology make for a great career, offering a good income , work-life balance and opportunities to travel. They also offer a chance to make significant contributions to the world, by working on important societal problems. I want young women to have these opportunities. I’ve been working on this issue for decades. When I came to Harvey Mudd College in 2006, the computer science department was averaging only about 10 percent women majors. The faculty had decided to make significant changes to attract more women. They redesigned their introductory computer science courses to focus less on straight programming and more on creative problem-solving. They included topics to show the breadth of the field and the ways in which it could benefit society. In order to reduce the intimidation factor for women and other students with no prior coding experience, they split the course into two sections, black and gold (Harvey Mudd’s colors), with black for those who had prior programming experience and gold for those with no prior experience. This worked wonders to create a supportive atmosphere. Making the Field Exciting for Women Instead of traditional homework, which can be isolating, the faculty assigned team-based projects so students coded together. And most importantly, they made the courses fun. The intro computer science courses went from being the least-liked course in our core curriculum to being the most popular. After the courses were introduced in 2007, we saw an immediate and steady increase in the percentage of female students majoring in computer science. Within four years, we went from averaging around 10 percent women majors to averaging 40 percent. We have continued to average 40 percent since 2011. In addition, faculty created early summer research opportunities designed for students who had completed only one or two computer science courses, and encouraged their first-year female students to participate. A number of studies have shown that research experiences for undergraduate students increase retention and confidence in STEM fields, factors that are particularly important for women and minorities . Harvey Mudd’s female students who participated in early computer science research projects indeed reported greatly increased interest in the discipline and a boost in confidence. They realized they could do the work of a computer scientist and that they enjoyed it as well. We also send large contingents of women students each year to the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing, the largest conference for women working in technology fields. At this event, students get to see role models and are excited about the many amazing technology career paths they can pursue. Other institutions are starting to take up our approaches. For instance, the Building Recruiting and Inclusion for Diversity (BRAID) initiative that we launched with the Anita Borg Institute is working to build computer science diversity at 15 academic institutions. We are about to offer our intro computer science course as a free massive open online course (MOOC) on edX , so professors and students can access the course materials. There’s Still Work to Be Done However, many barriers and challenges remain. The National Science Foundation’s most recent (2012) report shows that computer science has the lowest proportion of women receiving bachelor degrees of all the STEM fields. The percentage dipped to a mere 11 percent from 2007 to 2009 and gradually returned to 14 percent by 2013 to 2014. Computer science should be a required part of secondary education, but a lot of schools don’t have computer science teachers. Most young people who go to college today have not had much exposure to computer science . We also have to combat the cultural belief that some people are simply born with math, science or computer talent and others are simply “not good at it.” There’s lots of research that shows that persistence and hard work play a much larger role in success in any area of science and engineering than “native ability.” Another serious challenge is posed by the media portrayal of careers in technology, which builds certain stereotypes. I want people to think about how we can change our images of who we consider to be competent in technology. At the moment, the image of the computer scientist is limited to a white or Asian male. One thing we know for sure is that you get better solutions if you have more diverse teams working on them. We need the female perspective to get the best solutions to very pressing problems. Need for Diversity We also need more African Americans, Latinos and Latinas, poets, football players and artists involved in creating technology. Right now there is unfilled demand for computer science grads and not just in the tech industry. I want computer science and technology to be a world that embraces everyone who has passion, ability and interest, whether they look like the dominant group or not. Today, computer science touches all industries. Its products are embedded in our daily lives. Addressing the significant problems of the world—from climate change to health care to poverty—will involve technology. I think the world will be an incredibly exciting place and we will see amazing technological developments when we create a much more diverse tech community. Maria Klawe is president at Harvey Mudd College . She serves on the boards of Microsoft Corporation and Broadcom Corporation , as well as the nonprofits Math for America and EdReports . Klawe is a past president of the Association of Computing Machinery in New York, past chair of the board of trustees of the Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology in Palo Alto and a past trustee of the Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics in Los Angeles. She has held leadership positions with the American Mathematical Society , the Computing Research Association , the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics and the Canadian Mathematical Society . She is a trustee for the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute in Berkeley. Until recently, she was a member of the Stanford Engineering Advisory Council and the Advisory Council for the Computer Science Teachers Association . She was elected as a fellow of the Association of Computing Machinery in 1996 and as a founding fellow of the Canadian Information Processing Society in 2006. Harvey Mudd College receives funding from many organizations, including the Ahmanson Foundation, the Annenberg Foundation, the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation, the Arthur Vining Davis Foundations, Camille & Henry Dreyfus Foundation, Edison International, the Hearst Foundations, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Honeywell, Intel Corporation, the Fletcher Jones Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the National Institute of Standards & Technology, the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Ralph M. Parsons Foundation, Research Corporation for Science Advancement and the John Stauffer Charitable Trust. This article first appeared in The Conversation .",
"URL": "https://www.newsweek.com/how-can-we-encourage-more-women-study-computer-science-341652"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Updated | Microsoft Corporation has agreed to buy LinkedIn Corporation for $26.2 billion in its biggest-ever deal, combining the software giant's fast-growing cloud services business with the world's largest online network for professionals. The offer of $196 per share represents a premium of 49.5 percent to LinkedIn's Friday closing price. LinkedIn's shares were jumped 48 percent to $194.28 before the opening bell on Monday. Microsoft's shares were down 3.3 percent. \"Today is a re-founding moment for LinkedIn,\" Reid Hoffman, chairman of LinkedIn's board, said in a statement. Jeff Weiner will remain chief executive of LinkedIn, reporting to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. \"I have always had a great admiration for LinkedIn,\" Nadella said in a video on Microsoft's website. \"I have been talking with Reid and Jeff for a while ... I have been thinking about this for a long time.\" The deal is expected to close in 2016, the companies said in a joint statement. Microsoft said it would issue new debt to fund the deal. After the deal, LinkedIn will become part of Microsoft's productivity and business processes unit. This article has been updated with additional details about the deal.",
"URL": "https://www.newsweek.com/microsoft-acquiring-linkedin-469668"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "U.S. stocks tumbled Wednesday with the technology sector, the largest sector weight in the S&P 500, acting as the primary culprit. The tech-heavy Nasdaq-100 Index shed 4.40 percent while the Technology Select Sector Index dropped 4.85 percent. Not all traders were frowning, however. Positioning in some leveraged inverse technology exchange traded funds (ETFs) indicates some traders were prepared for Wednesday's technology tumble. Continue Reading Below What Happened Among inverse leveraged technology ETFs, the Direxion Daily Technology Bear 3X Shares (NYSE: TECS Opens a New Window. ) is one of traders' favorites. TECS looks to deliver triple the daily inverse Opens a New Window. returns of the Technology Select Sector Index. More From Benzinga JPMorgan Finds Multiple Reasons To Turn Bullish On Lumentum Opens a New Window. Some Traders Were Prepared For Wednesday's Tech Slide Opens a New Window. Wall Street Sees Worst Day in 8 Months: ETF Winners & Losers Opens a New Window. That index includes exposure to companies in the following industries: computers and peripherals; software; diversified telecommunications services; communications equipment; semiconductors and semi-conductor equipment; internet software and services; IT services; electronic equipment, instruments and components; wireless telecommunication services; and office electronics, according to Direxion . TECS can serve as a short-term hedge on long positions in Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL Opens a New Window. ) and Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT Opens a New Window. ) because those two stocks combine for over a quarter of the underlying index's weight. Advertisement Why It's Important Flows data indicate some traders were bracing for the retreat in technology stocks prior to Wednesday. For the 30 days ended Oct. 9, 2018, traders added an average of almost $128,600 a day to the bearish TECS, according to Direxion data . TECS was not the only bearish technology ETF traders displayed enthusiasm for over that period. During that time frame, the Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bear 3X Shares (NYSE: SOXS Opens a New Window. ) averaged daily inflows of nearly $301,000. SOXS attempts to deliver triple the daily inverse returns Opens a New Window. of the PHLX Semiconductor Sector Index. What's Next Earnings season will soon test the validity of the short technology thesis. From Oct. 22 through Nov. 2, about two-thirds Opens a New Window. of the Technology Select Sector Index delivers quarterly results. Over the same period, about 40 percent of the PHLX Semiconductor Sector Index reports earnings. Related Links: A New IPO ETF. Opens a New Window. Bell Tolls For These Leveraged ETFs Opens a New Window. . 2018 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.",
"URL": "https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/some-traders-were-prepared-for-wednesdays-tech-slide"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Whirlpool Corporation (NYSE: WHR), Amgen Inc. (NASDAQ: AMGN), and Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) are very different companies, but they all share one thing in common: Our Motley Fool contributors think now's a good time to add them to dividend portfolios. What makes these companies special? Read on to learn why Whirlpool could be a bargain-bin buy because of tariffs, Amgen could benefit from dividend growth thanks to new drugs, and Microsoft's big bet on the cloud makes it a savvy buy. Take this high-yield stock for a spin Continue Reading Below Sean Williams Opens a New Window. (Whirlpool): Although I've probably beaten the door down on Whirlpool in recent months as its share price has continued to decline, I'm going to do it once again. When it comes to top-tier dividend stocks, few if any look more attractive than appliance kingpin Whirlpool. There's little denying that Whirlpool is going through some tough times at the moment. In particular, the trade war building between the U.S. and other markets, including China, has pushed up the company's steel and aluminum costs, which in turn have coerced it to raise its prices in the United States. Since this is Whirlpool's most lucrative market, higher costs and weaker sales from consumer sticker shock have hurt its sales and profitability. But the thing to remember, here, is that Whirlpool has been down this road many times before. After all, it is a cyclical company. Its management team understands how to manage its expenditures and shift its focus to higher-growth regions. In recent years, the company has been buying its way into Asia Opens a New Window. , which offers a double-digit annual growth opportunity. We've also been down a similar path before, where Whirlpool has had to raise its unit prices to account for rising raw material costs. And while sticker shock is a genuine concern, it tends to last only for a few quarters. Historically, the U.S. economy has spent 86% of the time since the end of World War II in a period of economic expansion, and that bodes well for a brand-name appliance maker. Fundamentally, dipping your toes in the water also appears to make a lot of sense. At a forward P/E of just 7.6, Whirlpool is as cheap as it's been in a decade Opens a New Window. . And, as the icing on the cake, it's parsing out a 3.6% yield. It's not the flashiest or fastest-growth dividend stock by any means, but it should get the job done for your portfolio if you buy and hold for a minimum of five years. Advertisement A double-digit dividend grower Todd Campbell Opens a New Window. ( Amgen): It's not the highest income producing stock in biopharma, but Amgen may offer an opportunity for upside that shouldn't be ignored by income investors. Following a 15% year-over-year increase to its dividend, its shares yield a competitive 2.7%, and thanks to new drug approvals and a packed R&D pipeline, there should be plenty of dividend-friendly cash flow to support future dividend hikes. Amgen's pipeline hasn't stirred investors' imaginations as much as pipelines at smaller upstarts, but some important wins over the past few years are allowing revenue to grow despite slowing sales of its older drugs, including Neupogen, Epogen, and Enbrel. After a study showed Opens a New Window. it reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events, sales of the company's cholesterol-lowering biologic Repatha jumped 78% year over year to $148 million last quarter. Blincyto, a drug targeting a specific form of leukemia, saw sales climb 40% year over year to $60 million, and sales of Prolia, an osteoporosis drug, grew 21% to $610 million last quarter. Overall, Amgen's sales clocked in at $6.1 billion in Q2, up 4% from last year, and its EPS increased 17% to $3.83. Management now expects its top line to exceed $22.5 billion this year, up from prior guidance of at least $21.9 billion, and its EPS to eclipse $13.30, up from its prior estimate of at least $12.80. Recent approvals, including Aimovig, a migraine drug, Parsabiv, a drug used to prevent calcium from being released by bones in dialysis patients, and Kanjinti, a biosimilar approved in the EU as an alternative to the blockbuster cancer drug Herceptin, all support future sales and profit growth. R&D projects, including a biosimilar to the $18 billion plus Humira and slate of immuno-oncology drugs could also move the needle for investors. You need to take another look at this tech giant Chris Neiger Opens a New Window. (Microsoft): Yes, there are plenty of other companies out there that can beat Microsoft's current dividend yield of about 1.6%, but what the company lacks in yield it more than makes up for in other areas. First, consider that Microsoft has a 14-year history of consecutively raising its dividend, and its dividend payments only make up about 40% of the company's free cash flow, which means it has plenty of room to increase its dividend over time Opens a New Window. . Additionally, investors should take Microsoft's cloud-computing revenue growth and potential in mind. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the company grew its Intelligent Cloud sales by 23%, and it now makes up about a one-third of the company's total revenue. The company's cloud-computing Opens a New Window. growth over the past few years has helped Microsoft become the No. 2 public cloud-computing company, right behind Amazon . That's important for investors to take note of because this market will be worth an estimated $300 billion just three years from now. Finally, Microsoft grew total revenue in the fourth quarter by 17% year over year, to $30.1 billion, thanks to increasing sales from its Productivity and Business Process segment (up 13%) and its More Personal Computing segment (up 17%). With this tech giant's sales firing on all cylinders and its potential to continue benefiting from the cloud-computing market, investors would be wise to give Microsoft's stock strong consideration. 10 stocks we like better than Microsoft When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor , has quadrupled the market.* David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks Opens a New Window. for investors to buy right now... and Microsoft wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys. Click here Opens a New Window. to learn about these picks! *Stock Advisor returns as of August 6, 2018 Teresa Kersten is an employee of LinkedIn and is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. LinkedIn is owned by Microsoft. Chris Neiger Opens a New Window. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Sean Williams Opens a New Window. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Todd Campbell Opens a New Window. owns shares of Amgen and Microsoft. His clients may have positions in the companies mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Amgen. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy Opens a New Window. .",
"URL": "https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/3-top-dividend-stocks-to-buy-right-now"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Cloud computing is big business. Public cloud spending is expected to grow 18% year over year to an estimated $260 billion in 2017, according to Opens a New Window. market research company Gartner . That growth is expected to skyrocket to $411 billion by 2020. Continue Reading Below Gartner states that the growth in cloud computing will be driven by \"the migration of infrastructure to the cloud and increased demand from increasingly compute-intensive workloads (such as artificial intelligence Opens a New Window. [AI], analytics and Internet of Things [IoT]).\" The market size of this opportunity is attracting the biggest names in technology. Investors looking to profit from this growing trend should consider Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN) , Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) , and Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOGL) (NASDAQ: GOOG) , the clear leaders in the cloud computing revolution. Company 2016 IaaS Revenue (in millions) 2016 Market Share % YOY Growth Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) $9,775 44.2 45.9% Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) $1,579 7.1 61.1% Alibaba (NYSE: BABA) $675 3.0 126.5% Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) (NASDAQ: GOOGL) $500 2.3 100% Rackspace $484 2.2 5% All others 9,147 41.2 13.2% What is cloud computing? Cloud computing Opens a New Window. in its simplest terms is the storing and accessing of computer programs and data over the internet. These services are typically used as needed or on demand. The \"cloud\" referred to in cloud computing is the internet, so called because, in the early days online, some diagrams used the image of clouds to depict a concept that was not as widely understood as it is today. Continue Reading Below ADVERTISEMENT In some instances, a business may need additional computing resources, and making a large capital investment for additional servers or software might not be practical. This is especially true when trying to meet peak or seasonal demand. Cloud computing can provide a cost-effective solution. There are several types of services that are covered under the broad heading of cloud computing. Infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) allows companies to rent time and space on servers on a pay-as-you-go basis, and the segment is expected to post the most substantial growth over the next five years. Software-as-a-service (SaaS) is -- as the name implies -- the use or delivery of software applications via the internet. These normally require a subscription and the provider will typically handle any regular maintenance updates and security patches. Microsoft Office 365 is a great example of this. Platform-as-a-service (PaaS) provides the platform, environment, and tools necessary to for the development, running, and testing of apps and software. A software developer kit like Google's App Engine is a good illustration. Cloud computing can also be used for file storage, backup and recovery, and data analytics. Almost anything that can be accomplished locally can be done in the cloud. Amazon When it comes to cloud computing, Amazon is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. The company debuted Amazon Web Services (AWS) in 2006 as a way of renting unused space on its massive server farms, and in doing so, pioneered the IaaS market. From those humble beginnings, AWS has become Amazon's fastest growing and most profitable business segment. To give this some perspective, Synergy Research Group estimates that Amazon's cloud business is \"bigger than it next five largest competitors combined.\" According to Gartner's Magic Quadrant Opens a New Window. Amazon is the undisputed frontrunner in IaaS and has been for the last decade. It controls an estimated 40% of the market and a significant lead over its next nearest competitor. The company also leads in the integrated IaaS+PaaS market. AWS offers a wide variety of pay-as-you-go services including database storage, application services, analytics, and artificial intelligence. In the third quarter 2017, AWS saw net sales grow 55% year over year, producing 10% of Amazon's revenue and all of its profit. In fact, AWS is currently subsidizing the company's e-commerce business, which is operating at a loss. The reason the cloud computing segment contributed so much is because of its really massive operating margins. Of the $4.6 billion in revenue generated by AWS, it produced operating income of $1.17 billion -- operating margins of over 25%. The customer list for AWS is a veritable Who's Who of well-known companies, including Netflix, Inc. , Ancestry.com, Expedia, Inc. , Live Nation Entertainment , and Hulu. Microsoft Microsoft is a significant player in more than one segment of cloud computing. The company is the leader in the SaaS market according to Synergy Research Group Opens a New Window. . Microsoft is also a key player in the IaaS market, with its Azure cloud platform second to only AWS, with an estimated 11% market share. The company is also the only other company in the \"leader\" quadrant, according to Gartner, which estimated Azure's end-of-2016 revenue run rate at approximately $3 billion. Azure has been seeing robust adoption, particularly among those with a penchant for Microsoft products and working environment. While Azure's offerings are still dwarfed by AWS, the company continues to beef up Azure to include additional services and its expertise to help customers with deployment. In the most recent quarter, Microsoft's Office commercial products grew 10%, largely the result of commercial revenue from Office 365, which jumped 42% year over year. The company's intelligent cloud segment grew 17% year over year, with revenue from its Azure Cloud increasing 90% over the prior-year quarter. Google Google is known for its ubiquitous search, but because of the data centers and server farms needed to facilitate that business, the company has effectively been a cloud company since day one. Google places a distant third in the cloud computing arena, garnering an estimated 6% of the market. It should be noted that while the company has had a platform offering since 2008, it didn't enter the IaaS market until 2013. Google Cloud has made remarkable headway in a relatively short time, and the company has been aggressively playing catch-up. Urs Hölzle, Google's senior vice president of technical infrastructure, has stated that he believes that within several years, the company's cloud computing will generate as much revenue as its advertising business. Two years ago, the company hired Diane Greene, co-founder of VMWare to run its cloud business. Ms. Green believes that Google Cloud could take on AWS for the top spot as early as 2022. Google also believes its world-class artificial intelligence will attract an increasing number of cloud customers. The company is a pioneer in the field of AI Opens a New Window. , and during its third quarter 2017 earnings conference call, Google CEO Sundar Pichai stated, \"Customers tell us they are switching to Google Cloud Platform because of our prowess in data analytics and machine learning.\" For the three months ended September 30, 2017, Google's \"other revenues\", which includes cloud computing and the Google Play app store, grew 40% year over year to $3.4 billion and amounted to 12% of Google's revenue, up from 11% in the prior year period. Final thoughts Cloud computing is still a relatively young concept, having been pioneered by Amazon in 2006. Cisco 's Global Cloud Index report estimates that annual global cloud traffic will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 30% between 2015 and 2020 and more than quadrupled during that time. The report also forecasts that over the same five years, public cloud workloads will grow from 49% of the total to 68%. This continuing migration to the cloud will provide a growing and lucrative opportunity for cloud providers. The market leaders in cloud computing will provide a way for businesses to tap into technological advances such as cybersecurity, the internet of things, and artificial intelligence. According to John Dinsdale, a Chief Analyst and Research Director at Synergy Research Group, \"it is becoming increasingly difficult for cloud providers outside of the leading pack to make an impression on the market share rankings.\" The early movers in this field will continue to reap the benefits for years and possibly decades to come. 10 stocks we like better than Amazon When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor , has tripled the market.* David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks Opens a New Window. for investors to buy right now... and Amazon wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys. Click here Opens a New Window. to learn about these picks! *Stock Advisor returns as of November 6, 2017 John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Teresa Kersten is an employee of LinkedIn and is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. LinkedIn is owned by Microsoft. Danny Vena Opens a New Window. owns shares of Alphabet (A shares), Amazon, and Netflix. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Alphabet (A shares), Alphabet (C shares), Amazon, and Netflix. The Motley Fool recommends Cisco Systems, Expedia, and Live Nation Entertainment. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy Opens a New Window. .",
"URL": "http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/12/02/3-top-cloud-computing-stocks-to-buy-now.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "As of this writing, the price of a single bitcoin token has risen 1,001% over the past 52 weeks. That figure is likely to have changed by the time you read this, and it's a coin toss whether bitcoin will move up or down from here. Continue Reading Below Bitcoin has created a lot of wealth in a hurry, but many investors stay away from this asset-less asset to focus on more substantial investments. And if you believe in digital currency as an idea but can't be convinced that bitcoin itself will stick around for the long haul, you can invest in bitcoin-like ideas by leaning on some household-name stocks. So we asked a few of your fellow investors here at The Motley Fool how traditional stocks can do a better job of managing your nest egg than through a risky bitcoin bet. Read on to see how they came up with Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) , IBM (NYSE: IBM) , and Oracle (NYSE: ORCL) . Told you they would sound familiar, didn't I? Buy shares in a business Danny Vena Opens a New Window. (Microsoft): As an accountant, I haven't invested in bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency because there aren't any underlying assets. This is more speculation than investing at this point, particularly in light of the 700% gain in bitcoin this year, which has all the makings of a bubble. The distributed database used by the underlying blockchain technology, however, could potentially revolutionize a number of different industries. Continue Reading Below ADVERTISEMENT Investors looking to invest in blockchain could choose to invest in a company that has a solid and growing business, provides necessary services to other companies, and is itself making a play in the area of blockchain. For me, that company is Microsoft. Known for its ubiquitous Office Suite of productivity software and the Internet Explorer browser, Microsoft has invested in a number of other areas that could significantly propel growth, like its investments in the areas of artificial intelligence Opens a New Window. and blockchain. Microsoft's Azure Cloud has become the strongest competitor to Amazon.com 's (NASDAQ: AMZN) Web Services (AWS) and has been closing the gap, according to research company Gartner. The company recently announced its Azure blockchain-as-a-service suite that offers numerous blockchain apps and \"supports an ever-growing number of distributed ledger technologies that address specific business and technical requirements.\" This is on top of an already thriving business. In its most recent quarter Opens a New Window. , Microsoft's revenue grew to $24.5 billion, a billion higher than consensus estimates, while earnings per share grew 17%. Business network site LinkedIn contributed $1.1 billion to revenue in the quarter and is seeing record levels of engagement. A big, blue bet on the blockchain industry at large Anders Bylund Opens a New Window. (IBM): There is no doubt in my mind that blockchain technologies will change the world for the better. What's less clear is exactly which digital tokens will hit the mainstream in a big way. Bitcoin, for example, is an early winner but may not survive in the long run. If you're interested in blockchain solutions but not ready to place your bets among the current assortment of cryptocurrencies and token chains, you should look into companies driving blockchain research for the long run. At the forefront of that effort, you'll find good old IBM. Big Blue is doing serious research on blockchain technologies Opens a New Window. , having already produced several dozen patents in that field. The company is finding ways to pair blockchain ledgers up with its world-leading artificial-intelligence tools under the IBM Watson banner. The next step is finding commercial applications and paying customers for all this. That's happening, too. IBM recently launched a blockchain-based platform to help food retailers track their wares from production to final sale, with a focus on food safety. Some of the largest food producers and grocery store chains in the world are already on board. Real-world implementations should follow in the next couple of years. Another IBM-powered blockchain tool is helping money center banks track their financial trading. Canadian banks use Big Blue's blockchain platforms to track and verify the identity of their customers. And on and on it goes. IBM provides the technology platform, helps clients develop blockchain-based tools to meet their needs, keeps driving the whole technology forward, and is building a large business opportunity for the long haul. So IBM is a strong blockchain play for patient investors. On top of that, the stock currently trades at the bargain-basement level of 11 times forward earnings while offering a cash-backed dividend yield of 3.9%. This is a winning investment in many ways, and IBM also puts you right at the center of the exploding blockchain industry -- without binding your investment to bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency in particular. The database king Tim Green Opens a New Window. (Oracle): Bitcoin is one application of blockchain technology. The success of blockchain does not imply the success of bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency, much like the success of the internet didn't imply the success of every overheated dot-com stock nearly 20 years ago. If you want to bet on blockchain technology without a stomach-churning amount of risk, digital trinkets aren't the answer. Given that blockchain is a type of database, it makes sense that Oracle is investing in the technology. The database giant launched its enterprise-grade blockchain cloud service in October, which promises to speed up business processes, reduce risk, and increase efficiency for its customers. Blockchain isn't the only major initiative Oracle is undertaking. The company announced the Oracle Autonomous Database Cloud Opens a New Window. , a cloud database service powered by the next-generation Oracle Database 18c. The Autonomous Database Cloud aims to lower costs by automating processes, using machine learning to tune performance and upgrade and patch itself automatically. Oracle is promising 99.995% up-time along with prices that handily undercut AWS. Like many legacy tech giants, Oracle finds itself in need of innovation. With the company's investments in blockchain technology and cloud computing, it's taking the steps necessary to maintain its database dominance. 10 stocks we like better than IBM When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor , has tripled the market.* David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks Opens a New Window. for investors to buy right now... and IBM wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys. Click here Opens a New Window. to learn about these picks! *Stock Advisor returns as of November 6, 2017 John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Teresa Kersten, an employee of LinkedIn, a Microsoft subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Anders Bylund Opens a New Window. owns shares of Amazon and IBM. Danny Vena Opens a New Window. owns shares of Amazon. Timothy Green Opens a New Window. owns shares of IBM. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Amazon. The Motley Fool also owns shares of Oracle. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy Opens a New Window. .",
"URL": "http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/11/21/forget-bitcoin-youre-better-off-buying-these-3-stocks.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": " Last Updated: October 17 2019 Article by Michael Koch, Daniel Cohen and Julie RosenthalGoodmans LLP In an expansion of section 36 of the Competition Act, an eight member majority of the Supreme Court has ruled that \"umbrella purchasers\" can be class members in price-fixing class actions. Umbrella purchasers are consumers who purchased products neither manufactured nor supplied by any conspirator in the price fixing, but who were nonetheless subjected to higher prices due to the price \"umbrella\" created by that price-fixing. This decision could have a significant impact on the potential damages payable by price-fixing conspirators. Background Pioneer Corp v. Godfrey dealt with a class action brought on behalf of all persons in British Columbia who purchased \"optical disc drives\" or products containing such drives (such as video game consoles). The defendants comprise a relatively large group, four of whom are alleged to account for approximately 94% of the optical disc drives sold in British Columbia during the relevant time. At the heart of the claim is an allegation that the defendants conspired to fix the prices they charged for the disc drives. The plaintiff claims damages under the Competition Act (the \"Act\") as well as for common law conspiracy. The claim was certified as a class action by the British Columbia Supreme Court, and that order was upheld by the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The claim was brought not only on behalf of persons who purchased products manufactured by the defendants, but also on behalf of persons who purchased disc drives (or products containing disc drives) that were manufactured by companies other than the defendants (referred to as \"umbrella purchasers\"). The plaintiff seeks damages in respect of those allegedly excessive prices as well as in respect of the prices charged on goods manufactured by the defendants. The Supreme Court had confirmed inPro-Sys Consultants v. Microsoft Corporation (\"Pro-Sys\") that \"indirect purchasers\" of products manufactured by the defendants could claim under section 36 for allegedly inflated prices, but had never before ruled on whether such prices paid by umbrella purchasers could also be the subject of a claim under the Act. Umbrella Purchasers The Supreme Court determined that umbrella purchasers could indeed advance claims under section 36 of the Act. The theory behind holding price-fixers liable to these purchasers is that a competitor, outside the cartel, might raise the price for their products in order to meet the market – as the Court described it, \"[I]n short, a rising tide lifts all boats.\" The Court found that the words of the Act, which provide a cause of action to any person who has \"suffered loss or damage as a result of\" the defendant's illegal conduct, did not narrow the class of claimants to those who purchased products directly from the defendants or who were indirectly supplied by the defendants. Moreover, the Court focused on the purpose of the Act – to provide consumers with \"competitive prices and product choices\" – as supporting claims by umbrella purchasers. The Court also focused on the ability of these claims to promote deterrence, an aspect of private enforcement under Canadian law that has lagged the law in the US, where treble damages are recoverable by plaintiffs in civil suits to deter criminal conduct. Finally, the Court determined that barring a class of purchasers who were intended by the defendants to pay higher prices as a result of their price-fixing is inconsistent with the compensatory goal of the Act. This same focus on the umbrella effects as the \"intended consequence\" of the defendants' anti-competitive behaviour influenced the Court's ruling that permitting umbrella claims would not lead to \"indeterminate liability\". It is premature to predict the impact of this ruling on the case before the Court or in any other civil action for price-fixing, and the Court acknowledged that \"this is not to say that umbrella purchasers' actions will not be complex or otherwise difficult to pursue\" from the perspective of leading evidence that shows a causal link between loss suffered and the defendant's conduct. Additional Findings In addition to its ruling extending section 36 claims to umbrella purchasers, the Court's decision also touched upon two important matters in class action law. First, the Court held that aggregate damage provisions in class action regimes are purely remedial and cannot be used to establish liability. Regardless of whether aggregate damages are certified as a common issue, the trial judge must be satisfied that any individuals who participate in a damage award actually suffered a loss. Second, the Court reiterated its decision in Pro-Sys, finding that for loss-related questions to be certified as common issues, plaintiffs need only demonstrate an expert methodology sufficiently credible or plausible to show that the loss reached the requisite purchaser level. It is not necessary that the methodology be able to show that each and every class member at that level suffered damage or identify those who did or did not. To discuss the Court's decision or competition or class action matters more generally, please contact the authors or any member of our Class Action or Competition Law Groups. The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com. Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article. Do you have a Question or Comment?Click here to email the AuthorInterested in the next Webinar on this Topic?Click here to register your Interest ContributorMichael KochGoodmans LLP Email FirmView Website Events from this Firm More from this Firm More from this Author News About this Firm Authors Michael KochDaniel CohenJulie Rosenthal More Popular Related Articles on Anti-trust/Competition Law from Canada Making It Rain: Supreme Court Allows Umbrella Purchaser Claims Torys LLP On September 20, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its long-awaited decision in an important competition class action. Pioneer Corp. v. Godfrey (Godfrey) Competition Bureau Reinforces Its Focus On Non-Notifiable Transactions McCarthy Tétrault LLP Transactions involving traditional manufacturing and services companies have received inquiries in addition to those in the digital sector. Supreme Court Of Canada Determines That Limitation Period Contained In S. 36(4)(a)(i) Of The Competition Act Is Subject To Discoverability Dentons In Pioneer Corp. v. Godfrey, 2019 SCC 42, an 8-1 majority of the Supreme Court of Canada determined that the discoverability rule applies to the limitation period in s. Supreme Court Of Canada Issues Landmark Competition Class Action Decision In Godfrey Appeals Borden Ladner Gervais LLP Today, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark competition class action decision in Toshiba Corporation, et al v Neil Godfrey and Pioneer Corporation, et al v Neil Godfrey. Competition Class Actions In Canada: The Supreme Court Resets The Ground Rules Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP In a landmark decision that was released this morning, the Supreme Court has revisited and reset the ground rules governing the availability of collective relief for consumers in Canada In association with Mondaq Advice Centres (MACs) Competition and Antitrust International Trade and Anti-Corruption Business Valuation and Financial Loss More Advice CentersRelated Topics Anti-trust/Competition Law Antitrust, EU Competition Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration Class Actions Related Articles The Godfrey Decision: Competition Class Action Certification Made (Even) Easier McMillan LLP Making It Rain: Supreme Court Allows Umbrella Purchaser Claims Torys LLP Competition Bureau Reinforces Its Focus On Non-Notifiable Transactions McCarthy Tétrault LLP Supreme Court Class Action Decision In Godfrey Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP Supreme Court Of Canada Clarifies Procedures For Class-Action Certification Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP Up-coming Events Search Region / Country...WorldwideLatin AmericaEuropeAsia PacificMiddle EastAsiaEuropean UnionBrazilCanadaChinaIrelandNetherlandsSwitzerlandUnited Arab EmiratesUKUnited StatesTopic...Accounting and AuditAnti-trust/Competition Law- Antitrust, EU Competition - Cartels, MonopoliesConsumer Protection- EducationCorporate/Commercial Law- M&A/Private EquityEmployment and HR- Contract of Employment- Discrimination, Disability & Sexual Harassment- Employee Benefits & Compensation- Employee Rights/ Labour Relations- Employment Litigation/ Tribunals- Health & Safety- Energy Law- RenewablesFamily and Matrimonial- Wills/ Intestacy/ Estate PlanningFinance and Banking- Financial Services- Fund Management/ REITsFood, Drugs, Healthcare, Life Sciences- Food and Drugs Law- HealthcareInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-structuring- Financial Restructuring- Insolvency/Bankruptcy- Insurance Laws and ProductsIntellectual Property- CopyrightLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration- Disclosure & Electronic Discovery & PrivilegeMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment- Advertising, Marketing & BrandingPrivacy- Data ProtectionReal Estate and Construction- Real Estate- Industry Updates & Analysis- Knowledge Management- TechnologyTax- Corporate Tax- Sales Taxes: VAT, GST- Tax AuthoritiesTechnology- Fin Tech- New Technology- SecurityWealth Management- Wealth & Asset ManagementShow More FiltersTimeframe...This WeekNext Two WeeksNext MonthNext QuarterEvent Type...BriefingBusiness BreakfastConferenceOtherPodcastRoundtableSeminarSpeaking EngagementSymposiumVideo/ AudioWebinarWorkshopLocation...Brazil- Sao PauloCanada- Calgary- Edmonton- Ontario- Toronto- VancouverChina- Beijing- ShanghaiIreland- DublinNetherlands- RotterdamSwitzerland- LausanneUK- Birmingham- LondonUnited Arab Emirates- DubaiUnited States- California- Dallas- Los Angeles- New York- San Diego- San Francisco- Washington- Washington, DCGO Tools Print Font Size:Translation ChannelsMondaq on Twitter Free News Alert Custom RSS Feed Contact Us | Your Privacy | Feedback © Mondaq® Ltd 1994 - 2019 All Rights Reserved Login / Register Free News Alert Privacy/ Cookies Terms & Conditions About Mondaq Unsubscribe TOPICS| REGIONS| COMPARATIVE GUIDES| ADVICE CENTRE| ABOUT ",
"URL": "http://mondaq.com/canada/x/853524/Antitrust Competition/Supreme Court Allows Pricefixing Class Action On Behalf Of Umbrella Purchasers To Proceed"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Theft of password or account information is cited as a concern for 47 per cent of respondents. Around 55 per cent of global respondents are experiencing multiple online risks, yet only 16 per cent say they take multiple proactive steps to help protect themselves and their data, the second annual Microsoft Computing Safety Index has found. The research was conducted by Microsoft Corporation to mark this year’s international Safer Internet Day. This year the MCSI also examined mobile safety behaviours, discovering that although less than half of respondents (42 per cent) run software updates on their personal computers, only 28 per cent run regular updates on their mobile devices, potentially compounding their risk. “Mobile devices often have just as much, if not more, valuable personal information stored on them as a home computer, making mobile devices equally attractive to data-stealing criminals,” Microsoft’s incoming chief online safety officer Jacqueline Beauchere said. “The latest MCSI results demonstrate that no matter where or how people access the internet, exercising safer online habits is essential. There are steps that people can take and technologies that they can employ to help prevent them from becoming a victim.” The MCSI surveyed more than 10,000 PC, smartphone and tablet users in 20 countries and regions about their personal approach to online safety and assigned a point scale of 0 to 100 based on their answers. The global average score was 34 for PC online safety and 40 for mobile. Countries surveyed in the MCSI were Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Singapore, Spain, South Korea, Turkey, the UK and the US. Theft of password or account information was cited as a concern for 47 per cent of respondents, with 33 per cent saying they use secure websites and 28 per cent saying they avoid using open wi-fi spots on their mobile devices. More than 45 per cent of respondents said they worry about computer viruses, with fewer than half (44 per cent) turning and leaving on firewalls, and just more than half (53 per cent) installing antivirus software on their PCs. Around 45 per cent of those surveyed said they worry about having their identity stolen, yet only 34 per cent have a personal identification number to unlock their mobile device, and just 38 per cent say they educate themselves about the latest steps to help prevent identity theft.",
"URL": "https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/Microsoft-study-finds-consumers-do-little-to-mitigate-online-risks.457512"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Microsoft CEO pours cold water on Yahoo interest He dismisses speculation Microsoft is interested in buying Yahoo Inc. Sydney: Microsoft Corporation Chief Executive Steve Ballmer dismissed speculation that the software giant might still be interested in buying Yahoo Inc, sending shares of the Internet company down 14 per cent. \"We made an offer, we made another offer. We moved on,\" Ballmer told a business luncheon in Sydney on Friday, when asked for the company's plans after a planned Web search advertising partnership between Yahoo and Google Inc fell through this week. \"We tried at one point to do a partnership around search and that didn't work either, and we moved on and they moved on. We are not interested in going back and re-looking at an acquisition. I don't know why they would be either, frankly,\" Ballmer said. He added that he thought there were still opportunities for some kind of partnership around search. Ballmer's comments came two days after Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang told an Internet conference in San Francisco that he believed a deal with Yahoo was still the best option for Microsoft. Both companies lag Google in the Web search market. Shares of Yahoo surged earlier this week on speculation that it and Microsoft were in advanced talks, after Google pulled out of the search ad deal with Yahoo. Yahoo officials later said that the rumours were untrue. Microsoft abandoned an unsolicited $47.5 billion takeover bid for Yahoo in May, after the Internet company had rejected its $33-per-share offer as too low. In June, Google and Yahoo announced that their planned search ad partnership, which Yahoo had struck as a way of fending off Microsoft. The two delayed implementation to allow the US Justice Department to review the deal, but Google this week withdrew from the pact rather than face a protracted legal fight after antitrust regulators had concerns. Yahoo shares fell $2.05 to $11.91 in morning trading on the Nasdaq, while Microsoft shares were up 1.92 per cent at $21.28. Also Watch Sacred Games: Casts Talk About Their Journey, Roles and Anurag Kashyap Thursday 09 August , 2018 Padwomen: Chandigarh Teens Are Making Sanitary Napkins To Help Underprivileged Thursday 09 August , 2018 World Tribal Day: Indian Politicians Try To Garner Votes Thursday 09 August , 2018 Watch: Inside India’s First Ikea Store Tuesday 07 August , 2018 Sunset in Chennai: DMK Patriarch M Karunanidhi No More Microsoft coropration Steve Ballmer Yahoo Inc.",
"URL": "https://www.news18.com/news/business/microsoft-ceo-pours-cold-water-on-yahoo-interest-301277.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "Washington : In a proposal that will hit Indian IT companies the most, US software giant Microsoft Corporation has suggested a whopping fee of $10,000 (over Rs 5 lakh) for a new category of H1B visas and $15,000 (more than Rs 7.5 lakh) for permanent residency or Green Card. Both the new categories of H-1B and Green Cards, according to the Microsoft plan, would have an annual capacity of 20,000 and would be restricted to STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). According to Microsoft, the proposed hike could see nearly $5billion raised in over a decade. The money thus raised, according to the US company, would be used for the STEM education programs. Microsoft is getting in on the H1B visa act. Reuters. Given that Indian techies grab the maximum number of H-1B visas, such a proposal, if accepted by the Congress, would hit the Indian IT companies the most. The Microsoft proposal comes even as visiting External Affairs Minister, SM Krishna, is expected to raise the issue of the hike in fees of H-1B visas, in his meeting with the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in New York early this week. The proposal was revealed at a Washington-based think-tank gathering last week by Brad Smith, general counsel & executive vice president, legal & corporate Affairs, of Microsoft. He said the money thus raised would be used to generate the necessary skilled manpower in the coming years. Microsoft currently has an opening of 6,000 jobs in the country, of which more than 3,400 jobs are reserved for researchers, developers and engineers. \"An effective national talent strategy therefore needs to combine long-term improvements in STEM education in the United States with targeted, short-term, high-skilled immigration reforms.\" \"If done right, the latter can help fund the former, and our white paper outlines specific recommendations,\" he said. Microsoft, he said, believes this initiative should include, among other things, funding for states to strengthen K-12 STEM education. This is by providing additional resources to recruit and train STEM teachers, broaden access to computer science in high school and expand higher education capacity to produce more STEM degrees. In his speech, Smith said Congress should create a new, supplemental category with 20,000 visas annually for STEM skills that are in short supply. \"In addition, Congress should take advantage of prior unused green cards by making a supplemental allocation of 20,000 new green card slots for workers with STEM skills, Smith said. Simultaneously, Microsoft released \"A National Talent Strategy\" policy paper with details of its proposals. \"To provide employers with immediate access to the highly talented STEM professionals that their businesses need, a new allocation of 20,000 H-1B visas for foreign nationals with a US bachelor's degree or equivalent foreign degree in a STEM discipline should be established,\" said the 32-page policy paper. To qualify for these visas, it said, employers would be required to make an investment of $10,000 toward the development of future American STEM workers for each visa sought from the new allocation. According to the policy paper, Microsoft conceded, this proposal will not solve the broad shortage of H-1B visas overall, given the stark disparity between the current supply of H-1B visas and the demand for skilled workers. \"But it will make an appreciable impact in addressing the talent crisis many businesses face today due to the shortage of high skilled STEM workers,\" it said. \"In addition to improving the ability of private-sector employers to meet their STEM-based workforce needs, full utilisation of this new allocation of visas would generate $200 million in investments for the American STEM pipeline annually. \"The incentive of immediate visa availability for STEM professionals would also connect participating employers? staffing strategies today directly to the effort to rebuild the American STEM pipeline for tomorrow,? it added. Microsoft s recommends recapturing 20,000 unused employment based green card numbers annually to reduce the green card backlog and generate up to $300 million per annum for new investments in the American STEM pipeline. This would help address the backlog and enable employers to retain targeted high-skilled foreign workers and attract the best and brightest from around the world. \"To qualify for these green card numbers, employers would invest $15,000 for the development of future American STEM workers for each green card number made available through recapture\", the policy paper said. The green card numbers should be assignable only to employees who already have an approved PERM labour certification and/ or I-140 immigrant visa petition, making them eligible for immediate processing of their green card applications, it said. \"Based on our own analysis, we believe that it would be fair and feasible to require an investment of $10,000 for each of these new STEM visas and $15,000 for each of these new STEM green cards. PTI",
"URL": "https://www.firstpost.com/business/microsoft-pushes-for-h1b-visa-fee-to-be-hiked-to-10k-474935.html"
},
{
"score": 1,
"subjectMatched": "Microsoft Corporation",
"text": "T R O U B L E D C O M P A N Y R E P O R T E R Wednesday, May 31, 2006, Vol. 10, No. 128 Headlines360 GLOBAL: Defaults on $20MM Promissory Note Issued to Met LifeABB LUMMUS: Gets Final Court Okay on $320 Million DIP FinancingABB LUMMUS: Bankruptcy Services Okayed as Claims & Balloting AgentABB LUMMUS: Withdraws Request to Employ FTI Consulting as AdvisorACCESS WORLDWIDE: Posts $1.2 Million Net Loss in First QuarterACURA PHARMACEUTICALS: Incurs $4.2 Million Net Loss in 1st QuarterADELPHIA COMMS: Dispute Ensues Over Bank Lenders DistributionADELPHIA: Barbs on Multi-Mil. Suit with Devon Trustee ContinuesADELPHIA COMMS: TCR Sports Wants FCC to Condition Sale to ComcastADVANCED COMMS: Posts $284,621 Net Loss in 2006 3rd Fiscal QuarterAH-DH APARTMENTS: Hires McGuire Craddock as Bankruptcy CounselAH-DH APARTMENTS: DB Holdings Taps PronskePatel as Bankr. CounselAIR CANADA: Settles Misconduct Litigation with Westjet AirlinesALLIED HOLDINGS: Court Approves 4th Amendment to DIP Loan PactALLIED HOLDINGS: Inks Amended Delivery Agreement with HondaAMERICAN ACHIEVEMENT: Restates 2005 Annual ReportAMERICAN CELLULAR: To Purchase Highland Cellular for $95 MillionAPPLETON PAPERS: Solicits Consents to Amend Senior Notes ContractARMSTRONG WORLD: Parent Company Earns $28 Million in First QuarterASARCO LLC: FCR & Asbestos Panel Balks at Estimation ProtocolASARCO LLC: Alvarez & Marsal Okayed as Fin'l & Turnaround AdvisorASARCO LLC: Encycle Trustee Wants to Hire American AppraisersATA AIRLINES: Inks Stipulation Allowing GOAA's Claim for $2 Mil.BAYOU GROUP: Files for Chapter 11 Protection in New YorkBAYOU GROUP: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case SummaryBERRY-HILL GALLERIES: Court Sets June 15 as Governmental Bar DateBIJOU-MARKET: Court Sets July 3 as Deadline for Filing of ClaimsBUCKEYE TECHNOLOGIES: Posts $795,000 Net Loss in 2006 1st QuarterCATHOLIC CHURCH: Dufresne Wants Portland's Claim Estimation DeniedCATHOLIC CHURCH: Tucson Panel Wants to Settle Claim for $367,500CATHOLIC CHURCH: Portland Asks Court to Disallow Claim No. 437CERVANTES ORCHARDS: Deere Says Disclosure Statement is IncompleteCHEMTURA CORP: Gets $85 Million from Water Additives Unit SaleCLARION TECHNOLOGIES: Posts $2.4 Mil. Net Loss in First QuarterCLEAN EARTH: Gets Interim Access to $750,000 DIP FinancingCLEAN EARTH: Has Until June 30 to File Chapter 11 PlanCLEAN EARTH: Court Approves Phil Daetwyler's Retention as COOCMS ENERGY: Posts $27 Million Net Loss in 2006 First QuarterCOMCAST CORP: Earns $466 Million in First Quarter Ended March 31DEATH ROW: U.S. Trustee Appoints Five-Member Creditors CommitteeDND TECHNOLOGIES: March 31 Balance Sheet Upside Down by $6.9 Mil.EASYLINK SERVICES: Posts $376,000 Net Loss in 2006 First QuarterELECTRIC CITY: Post $1.9 Million Net Loss in 2006 1st Fiscal Qtr.ELEPHANT TALK: Posts $487,146 Net Loss in 2006 First Fiscal Qtr.ENRON CORP: Ct. Dismisses Suit v. Caisse de Depot & Australia BankENRON CORP: Asks Court to Approve United Illuminating SettlementENRON CORP: Broadband Unit Demands $1.01M Debt Payment from i2ENTECH ENVIRONMENTAL: Posts $463,449 Net Loss in 2006 1st QuarterEPIXTAR CORP: Morrison Brown Replaces McClain & Co. as AuditorsEPIXTAR CORP: EICCG Wants to Sell Accounts Receivable to WFCBFORD MOTOR: S&P Puts Nine Related Debts' Low-B Ratings on WatchFRIENDLY ICE: Posts $1.8 Mil. Net Loss in 1st Quarter Ended Apr. 2FTS GROUP: Posts $5.9 Million Net Loss in 2006 1st Fiscal QuarterFUNCTIONAL RESTORATION: Hires SulmeyerKupetz as Bankruptcy CounselFUNCTIONAL RESTORATION: Panel Hires Pachulski Stang as CounselFUNCTIONAL RESTORATION: Taps Xroads Solutions as Financial AdvisorGLOBAL HOME: Court Okays Conway as Restructuring ConsultantsGSI GROUP: Repurchases Part of 12% Senior Notes for $7.4 MillionGULF COAST: Creditors Panel Wants Winstead Sechrest as CounselHAWS & TINGLE: Amends Chapter 11 Plan & Disclosure StatementINVERNESS MEDICAL: Expects to Spend $16.8 Mil. on Plant ClosuresIWT TESORO: McGladrey & Pullen Raises Going Concern DoubtJ. CREW: Earns $3.8 Million in Fiscal Year Ended Jan. 28, 2006JERNBERG INDUSTRIES: Wants Court to Approve PBGC Settlement AccordKIWA BIO-TECH: Posts $184,443 Net Loss in 2006 1st Fiscal QuarterKL INDUSTRIES: Hires Laner Muchin as Special Labor CounselKL INDUSTRIES: Court Approves RSM McGladrey as Financial AdvisorL-3 COMMS: Jury Awards OSI $125.6MM in Damages in N.Y. SuitLARRY'S MARKETS: Gets Interim Nod on Winterbauer as Labor CounselLEVITZ HOME: Landlords Want to Collect Unpaid RentsLEVITZ HOME: Court Grants Lease Assumption and Assignment PleaLOVESAC CORP: Gets Court Okay to Hire Squire Sanders as CounselLOVESAC CORP: Governmental Units Can File Claims Until July 31MIAD SYSTEMS: Amends Annual 2005 Report & Two 2006 Fiscal QuartersMIRANT CORP: Proposes to Acquire NRG Energy for $8 BillionMIRANT CORP: Acquisition Proposal Undervalues NRG EnergyNCP MARKETING: Files Plan & Disclosure Statement in NevadaNATIONAL MENTOR: To Buy Back $150 Mil. of 9-5/8% Sr. Sub. NotesNES RENTALS: Accepts $850MM Purchase Offer from Diamond CastleNEW ORLEANS: Chase Attempting to Arrange a $150 Million LoanNORSHIELD ASSET: Chapter 15 Petition SummaryNORTHWEST AIRLINES: Wants to Advance Employee Defense CostsNORTHWEST AIRLINES: Honeywell Wants $889,644 Claim PaidNRG ENERGY: Rejects Mirant Corp.'s $8 Billion Acquisition ProposalNRG ENERGY: Board Believes Mirant Corp.'s Proposal Undervalues NRGONEIDA LTD: U.S. Trustee Appoints Three-Member Equity CommitteeONEIDA LTD: Court Okays Otterbourg Steindler as Panel's CounselOPTINREALBIG.COM: Judge Tallman Dismisses Chapter 11 CasesORIS AUTOMOTIVE: BBK Okayed to Provide Management Support ServicesOWENS CORNING: Wants to Expand Ernst & Young's Scope of EmploymentPARTS PLUS: Del. Bank. Court Closes Remaining Chapter 11 CasePATH 1: Posts $1.7 Million Net Loss in Quarter Ended March 31PBS HOLDING: March 31 Balance Sheet Upside Down by $486,382PLIANT: Wells Fargo Says Plan Violates Indentures & Bankr. CodeREFCO INC: Must Produce Documents for Noteholders' CommitteeREFCO INC: Chapter 7 Trustee Can Liquidate Customer ClaimsROO GROUP: Posts $2.6 Mil. Net Loss in 2006 First Fiscal QuarterSAINT VINCENTS: Queens Hospital Sale Hearing Set for June 26SAINT VINCENTS: Sets Up Staten Island Sale Bidding GuidelinesSAINT VINCENTS: Wants to Pay $375,000 Break-up Fee to CastletonSENSOR SYSTEM: Weinberg & Company Raises Going Concern DoubtSERACARE LIFE: Can Use Cash Collateral on Interim BasisSIERRA HEALTH: Earns $32.7 Million in 2006 First Fiscal QuarterSILICON GRAPHICS: Can Continue Workers' Compensation ProgramSILICON GRAPHICS: Wants to Hire Ordinary Course ProfessionalsSILICON GRAPHICS: Seeks Court Nod for Compensation ProceduresTRANSAX INTERNATIONAL: Auditor Raises Going Concern DoubtUSA COMMERCIAL: U.S. Trustee Names 7-Member Contract Rights PanelUSG CORP: Settles CCR, et al., Performance Bond Dispute for $13MMUSG CORP: Illinois Revenue Dept. Demands $2.49MM in Tax PaymentsVARIG S.A.: Mitsui Says U.S. Court Protection is InappropriateVERILINK CORP: Court Okays William Gibbons as Local Bankr. CounselVERILINK CORP: Bankruptcy Administrator Appoints 7-Member PanelWORLDCOM INC: Inks Stipulation Expunging Bernard Ebbers' ClaimsWORLDCOM INC: Settles Philadelphia's Admin. Tax Claims for $432KZOOMERS HOLDING: Inks $3.5 Mil. Financing Deal with D'Alessandro* Upcoming Meetings, Conferences and Seminars *********360 GLOBAL: Defaults on $20MM Promissory Note Issued to Met Life----------------------------------------------------------------360 Global Wine Co., currently owning 50% of the membership unitsof Kirkland Knightsbridge, LLC, guaranteed the existing obligationof KKLLC for a promissory note originally issued in the amount of$20,000,000, to Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. That promissorynote is now delinquent and Met Life notified KKLLC on April 4,2006 that the loan balance has been accelerated and is due in itsentirety.The amount due Met Life as of March 31, 2006 was $21,186,832,including interest of $1,227,499 that has been accruing at adefault rate of 18% per annum since Dec. 1, 2005.Met Life said it would be initiating a foreclosure action againstthe KKLLC assets securing the promissory note as well as assets ofKirkland Cattle Co. and other assets of KKLLC owner LarryKirkland. The Company does not have the financial capacity toremedy this loan balance demand. Financial StatementsThe Company reported a net loss of $123.2 million on $4.23 millionrevenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006, as compared toa net loss of $1.7 million on $449,000 revenues for the threemonths ended March 31, 2005.As of March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed a$25.66 million stockholder's deficit and a strained liquiditywith $18.37 million in total current assets available to pay$142.9 million in total current liabilities due within the next12 months. About 360 Global WineHeadquartered in Napa Valley, California, 360 Global Wine Company-- http://www.360wines.com/-- is a California based wine producer and marketer of wine brands. 360 Global Wine Company's extensiveand diverse portfolio includes premium wines and ultra-premiumluxury wine brands, all with an emphasis on superior quality.ABB LUMMUS: Gets Final Court Okay on $320 Million DIP Financing--------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware allowed ABBLummus Global Inc., on a final basis, to obtain up to $320 millionof debtor-in-possession financing from ABB Treasury Center (USA)Inc. and ABB Holdings, Inc. The DIP Financing is composed of a$120 million unsecured revolving credit facility and a $200million credit enhancement facility.The Debtor told the Court that it needs the financing for theorderly continuation of its business operations. In addition, theDebtor pointed out that its ability to obtain sufficient workingcapital and liquidity through the incurrence of new debt is vitalto its successful reorganization.As adequate protection, the Debtor grants ABB Treasury and ABBHoldings superpriority claims and liens on all of its assets.Objections to the Final DIP Order from any committee appointed inthe Debtor's case are due today.Headquartered in Houston, Texas, ABB Lummus Global Inc. --http://www.abb.com/lummus/-- offers advanced process technologies, project management, engineering, procurement andconstruction-related services for the oil and gas, petroleumrefining and petrochemical process industries. The group overseesthe construction of process plants and offshore facilities. Thecompany filed for chapter 11 protection on Apr. 21, 2006 (Bankr.D. Del. Case No. 06-10401). Jeffrey N. Rich, Esq., at Kirkpatrick& Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP, represents the Debtor. LauraDavis Jones, Esq., at Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl Young, Jones &Weintraub, LLP, serves as the Debtor's co-counsel. An InformalAsbestos Claimants' Committee has been formed in the Debtor's caseand is represented by Richard B. Schiro. Joseph D. Frank, Esq.,at Frank/Gecker LLP serves as the Asbestos Committee's counsel.No Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has been appointed inthe Debtor's case. When the Debtor filed for protection from itscreditors, it estimated more than $100 million in assets anddebts.ABB LUMMUS: Bankruptcy Services Okayed as Claims & Balloting Agent------------------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Judith K. Fitzgerald of the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtfor the District of Delaware authorized ABB Lummus Global Inc. toemploy Bankruptcy Services, LLC, as its claims, balloting, andnoticing agent, nunc pro tunc to April 21, 2006.Bankruptcy Services will: (a) prepare and serve required notices in the Debtor's bankruptcy case, including: (1) a notice of the commencement of the chapter 11 case and the initial meeting of creditors under Section 341(a) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code; (2) a notice of the claims bar date, if any; (3) notices of objections to claims; (4) notices of any hearings on the Disclosure Statement and confirmation of the Plan, as each may be amended; and (5) other miscellaneous notices as the Debtor or this Court may deem necessary or appropriate for an orderly administration of the bankruptcy case; (b) within five business days after the service of a particular notice, file with the Clerk's Office a certificate or affidavit of service that includes: (1) a copy of the notice served; (2) an alphabetical list of persons on whom notice was served, along with their addresses; and (3) the date and manner of service; (c) continue to provide necessary services in connection with prepetition balloting activities; (d) maintain copies of all proofs of claim and proofs of interest filed in the Debtor's case; (e) maintain an official claims register in the Debtor's case by docketing all proofs of claim and proofs of interest in a claims database that includes information on: (1) the name and address of the claimant or interest holder and any agent thereof, if the proof of claim or proof of interest was filed by an agent; (2) the date the proof of claim or proof of interest was received by BSI or the Court; (3) the claim number assigned to the proof of claim or proof of interest; and (4) the asserted amount and classification of the claim; (f) implement necessary security measures to ensure the completeness and integrity of the claims register; (g) transmit to the Clerk's Office a copy of the claims register on a weekly basis, unless requested by the Clerk's Office on a more or less frequent basis; (h) maintain an up-to-date list for all entities that have filed proofs of claim or proofs of interest and make that list available upon request to the Clerk's Office or any party-in-interest; (i) maintain and update a website containing up-to-date information regarding significant events and deadlines in the Debtor's bankruptcy case and copies of some court documents, like the Plan and Disclosure Statement; (j) provide access to the public for examination of the proofs of claims or proofs of interest filed in the Debtor's bankruptcy case without charge during regular business hours; (k) record and provide notice of all transfers of claims pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2001(e), if directed to do so by the Court; (l) promptly comply with further conditions and requirements as the Clerk's Office or the Court may at any time prescribe; and (m) provide other claims processing, noticing, balloting, and related administrative services as may be requested from time to time by the Debtor.Kathy Gerber, a senior vice president at Bankruptcy Services, LLC,discloses that the Firm's professionals bill: Designation Hourly Rate ----------- ----------- Senior Managers/On-Site Consultants $225 Other Senior Consultants $185 Programmer $130 - $160 Associate $135 Data Entry Staff $40 - $60Bankruptcy Services charges $225 per hour for schedulepreparation.Ms. Gerber assures the Court that Bankruptcy Services does notrepresent any interest adverse to the Debtor or its estate and is\"disinterested\" as that term is defined in Section 101(14) of theBankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Houston, Texas, ABB Lummus Global Inc. --http://www.abb.com/lummus/-- offers advanced process technologies, project management, engineering, procurement andconstruction-related services for the oil and gas, petroleumrefining and petrochemical process industries. The group overseesthe construction of process plants and offshore facilities. Thecompany filed for chapter 11 protection on Apr. 21, 2006 (Bankr.D. Del. Case No. 06-10401). Jeffrey N. Rich, Esq., at Kirkpatrick& Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP, represents the Debtor. LauraDavis Jones, Esq., at Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl Young, Jones &Weintraub, LLP, serves as the Debtor's co-counsel. An InformalAsbestos Claimants' Committee has been formed in the Debtor's caseand is represented by Richard B. Schiro. Joseph D. Frank, Esq.,at Frank/Gecker LLP serves as the Asbestos Committee's counsel.No Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has been appointed inthe Debtor's case. When the Debtor filed for protection from itscreditors, it estimated more than $100 million in assets anddebts.ABB LUMMUS: Withdraws Request to Employ FTI Consulting as Advisor-----------------------------------------------------------------ABB Lummus Global Inc., informed the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theDistrict of Delaware that it is withdrawing its request to employFTI Consulting, Inc., as its financial advisor.The U.S. Trustee for Region 3 had objected to the Debtor'sretention of FTI citing that, George P. Stamas, Esq., a partner atKirkland & Ellis LLP, is currently an officer and director of FTI.Kirkland & Ellis represents the Debtor's parent, ABB Holdings,Inc.The Trustee also contended that FTI served as the financialadvisor of David Austern, the future claims representative inCombustion Engineering's case and the Combustion Engineeringtrust. The trustee says that this creates both an appearance ofimpropriety and a real actual conflict with FTI acting as Lummus'financial advisor while at the same time having served the futureclaims representative in Combustion Engineering's case.The Trustee further argued that the proposed engagement suggeststhat FTI will have indemnification and limitation of liabilityprovisions that are not warranted and may be inconsistent withprior decisions of the bankruptcy court in this district.Headquartered in Houston, Texas, ABB Lummus Global Inc. --http://www.abb.com/lummus/-- offers advanced process technologies, project management, engineering, procurement andconstruction-related services for the oil and gas, petroleumrefining and petrochemical process industries. The group overseesthe construction of process plants and offshore facilities. Thecompany filed for chapter 11 protection on Apr. 21, 2006 (Bankr.D. Del. Case No. 06-10401). Jeffrey N. Rich, Esq., at Kirkpatrick& Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP, represents the Debtor. LauraDavis Jones, Esq., at Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl Young, Jones &Weintraub, LLP, serves as the Debtor's co-counsel. An InformalAsbestos Claimants' Committee has been formed in the Debtor's caseand is represented by Richard B. Schiro. Joseph D. Frank, Esq.,at Frank/Gecker LLP serves as the Asbestos Committee's counsel.No Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has been appointed inthe Debtor's case. When the Debtor filed for protection from itscreditors, it estimated more than $100 million in assets anddebts.ACCESS WORLDWIDE: Posts $1.2 Million Net Loss in First Quarter--------------------------------------------------------------Access Worldwide Communications, Inc., reported financial resultsfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.Access reported a net loss of $1.2 million for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2006, compared to $600,000 loss for the first quarter of2005. The decline, although offset by the increased profit in theCompany's Business Services Segment, was the result of thedecrease in revenues from the Company's Pharmaceutical ServicesSegment along with the increase in interest expense on itsborrowings. Total weighted average common shares outstanding forthe quarters ended March 31, 2006 and March 31, 2005, were16,889,039 and 11,177,052, respectively.The Company's revenues decreased $0.4 million, or 3.8%, to$10 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006, compared to$10.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005.Revenues for the Pharmaceutical Segment decreased $1.9 million, or27.9%, to $4.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006,compared to $6.8 million for the three months ended March 31,2005. The decrease was primarily attributed to a reduction ofrevenue of $1.1 million in our medical education business. Thisreduction was caused primarily by a decrease in work beingperformed for three significant customers at the Company's medicaleducation division, which accounted for a loss in revenue ofapproximately $978,000 when compared quarter over quarter. Thefurther reduction was caused by a decrease in revenue of $800,000in Access' pharmaceutical communication business, which wasprimarily the result of a change in programs for two significantcustomers.One of these customers replaced an inbound program, which was inplace in the first quarter of 2005 and ended in August of 2005,with another similar program that has not had as successful anenrollment as the program that it replaced, thus causing adecrease in revenue.The other customer has two large programs, which previously hadteleservice representatives dedicated to their programs only, butnow utilize the Company's shared pool of representatives thatserve more than one client at a time. This change was requestedby the customer due to budget cut backs and has decreased theamount per billable hour that the Company charges the customer forthese programs.Revenues for the Business Segment, which includes the Company'smultilingual communications business, increased $1.5 million, or41.7%, to $5.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006,compared to $3.6 million for the three months ended March 31,2005. The increase in revenues was primarily attributed to therevenue generated in our Philippines communication center of $0.8million that had not yet begun operations as of the first quarterof 2005. Additionally, the Company experienced a 20% increase inrevenues domestically due to the acquisition of a significant newcustomer and from increased programs with two existing customers.Full-text copies of the Company's first quarter financialstatements for the three months ended March 31, 2006, areavailable for free at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a2a Going Concern DoubtBDO Seidman, LLP, in West Palm Beach, Florida, raised substantialdoubt about Access Worldwide Communications, Inc.'s ability tocontinue as a going concern after auditing the Company'sconsolidated financial statements for the years endedDec. 31, 2005, and 2004. The auditors pointed to the Company'srecurring losses from operations, negative cash flows, andaccumulated deficit.Headquartered in Boca Raton, Florida, Access WorldwideCommunications, Inc. (OTCBB: AWWC) -- http://www.accessww.com/-- is an established marketing company that provides a variety ofsales, communication and medical education services. Its spectrumof services includes medical meetings management, medicalpublishing, editorial support, clinical trial recruitment, patientcompliance, multilingual teleservices, product stocking anddatabase management, among others. Access Worldwide has about1,000 employees in offices throughout the United States and thePhilippines.At March 31, 2006, Access Worldwide Communications, Inc.'s balancesheet showed a $6,105,582 stockholders' deficit compared to a$5,060,322 deficit at Dec. 31, 2005.ACURA PHARMACEUTICALS: Incurs $4.2 Million Net Loss in 1st Quarter------------------------------------------------------------------Acura Pharmaceuticals, Inc., disclosed its financial results forthe first quarter ended March 31, 2006, to the Securities andExchange Commission on April 26, 2006.For the year ended March 31, 2006, the Company reported a $4.2million net loss on $3.9 million of net revenues, compared to a$1.9 million net loss on $1.9 million of net revenues for the yearended Dec. 31, 2005.As of March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed totalassets of $2 million and total debts of $9.4 million, resulting in$7.3 million deficit.A full-text copy of Acura Pharmaceuticals' Quarterly Report isavailable for free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a1c Going Concern DoubtBDO Seidman, LLP, expressed doubt about Acura Pharmaceuticals'ability to continue as a going concern after auditing theCompany's 2005 financial statements. The auditing firm pointed tothe Company's recurring losses from operations and net capitaldeficiency at Dec. 31, 2005.Headquartered in Palatine, Illinois, Acura Pharmaceuticals, Inc.-- http://www.acurapharm.com/-- is a specialty pharmaceutical company engaged in research, development and manufacture ofinnovative and proprietary abuse deterrent, abuse resistant andtamper resistant formulations intended for use in orallyadministered opioid-containing prescription analgesic products.Acura is actively collaborating with contract researchorganizations for laboratory and clinical evaluation and testingof product candidates formulated with its Aversion(R) Technology.ADELPHIA COMMS: Dispute Ensues Over Bank Lenders Distribution-------------------------------------------------------------The Official Committee of Equity Security Holders appointed in thechapter 11 cases of Adelphia Communications Corporation and itsdebtor-affiliates supports the Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors' request to hold back the distributions to be made tothe prepetition bank lenders under the ACOM Debtors' ModifiedFourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization. ObjectionsThe ACOM Debtors note that pursuant to a Court order approvingthree related agreements between the ACOM Debtors and theSecurities Exchange Commission, the Debtors and the Department ofJustice, and the Debtors and Rigas Family, dated May 26, 2005,the ACOM Debtors are required to oppose the Creditors Committee'srequest and are not permitted to propose a plan that withholdsany distribution to the Bank Lenders by reason of the pendency ofthe Bank Lender Avoidance Complaint unless ordered to do so bythe Court.According to Marc Abrams, Esq., at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, inNew York, the Debtors' agreement to oppose any hold back requestwas intended to formalize a \"handshake\" deal between the BankLenders and the Debtors, and to facilitate the Bank Lenders'cooperation and, ultimately, acceptance of the Plan.Mr. Abrams notes that while the Creditors Committee's Hold Backrequest as framed aims to preserve valuable estate assets,depending on the rate at which interest would accrue on any heldback distributions, the motion may result in incremental interestcosts of more than $400,000,000.Thus, the ACOM Debtors ask the Court to deny the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditor's request to hold backdistributions to prepetition bank lenders until the Courtdetermines the rate of interest, if any, required to be paid onheld back distributions and the impact of that interest accruedon the feasibility of the Plan.Several parties-in-interest agree that the payment of the bankclaims under the terms of the Plan is required under theGovernment Settlement Order and appropriate under the standardsof Rule 9019 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure: a. various Administrative Agents: -- Wachovia Bank National Association, -- Bank of America, N.A., -- the Bank of Nova Scotia -- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., -- Citibank, N.A., and -- Bank of Montreal; b. these Nominal Agents: -- ABN AMRO Bank N.V., -- Barclays Bank PLC, -- CIBC, INC., -- Merrill Lynch Capital Corp., -- PNC Bank, National Association, -- Societe Generale, S.A. -- Calyon New York Branch -- Bank of New York, & Bank of New York Company, Inc., and -- Credit Suisse, Cayman Branch, & the Royal Bank of Scotland; c. the Ad Hoc Committee of Non-Agent Secured Lenders; d. the Toronto-Dominion Bank; and e. various investment banks, namely: -- ABN AMRO Inc., -- BNY Capital Markets, Inc., -- Barclays Capital Inc., -- Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., -- CIBC World Markets Corp., -- Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc., -- J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., -- Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, -- PNC Capital Markets, Inc., -- Scotia Capital (USA) Inc., -- SunTrust Capital Markets, Inc., -- TD Securities (USA) LLC, and -- Banc of America Securities LLC, and its affiliate, Fleet Securities, Inc.The Non-Agent Committee asks the Court to reject the CreditorsCommittee's request because it attempts to use Section 502(d) todisallow the Non-Agent Committee members' claims. Under theplain language of Section 502(d) and established case law, theCreditors Committee must obtain adjudication on its avoidanceactions before raising Section 502(d).The Bank of Montreal contends that the Plan represents areasonable settlement and compromise of the allowance anddistribution issues.The Toronto-Dominion Bank relates that pursuant to a prepetitioninterest rate swap agreement between TD Bank and ChelseaCommunications, Inc., one of the Debtors, TD Bank holds a generalunsecured claim against Chelsea. Although TD Bank is a nameddefendant in the Bank Action Litigation, the litigation do notspecifically allege that TD Bank received any transfers orproperty from Chelsea that could be recoverable by Chelsea as aresult of the Bank Action.Accordingly, TD Bank asks the Court to deny the CreditorsCommittee's request to the extent that the request seeks todisallow or hold back a distribution to TD Bank on account of theChelsea Swap Claim. Section 502(d) provides no basis to disallowor hold back a distribution on TD Bank's Chelsea Swap Claim whenChelsea has no valid avoidance recovery claim against TD Bank onaccount of the Bank Action, Patrick L. Hayden, Esq., atMcGuireWoods LLP, in New York, argues.The Investment Banks note that the Plan provides for the paymentin cash of the Bank Lender Fee Claims. As affiliates of the BankLenders, some or all of the Investment Banks are holders of BankClaims arising from indemnification to which they are entitledunder the relevant Prepetition Credit Agreements. Those claimsconstitute Bank Claims under the Plan. Since the Committee hasnot sought relief against the Investment Banks, the references inits request to the treatment of Bank Claims should not beconstrued to apply to Bank Claims held by the Investment Banks.However, in an abundance of caution to the extent the CreditorsCommittee's request could be construed to affect Bank Claims heldby the Investment Banks, the Investment Banks ask the Court todeny the Creditors Committee's request. Plaintiffs Slam Investment Banks' ResponseThe putative class action plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending beforethe United States District Court for the Southern District of NewYork captioned In re Adelphia Communications Corp. Securities &Derivative Litigation, 03 MD 1529(LLM), believes it would bewrong to uphold or consider the response of the variousinvestments banks in connection with the Creditors' Committee'srequest to hold back distribution.As previously reported, the Investment Banks assert that as\"affiliates of the Banks\" they are \"holders of Bank Claimsarising from indemnification to which they are entitled under therelevant Prepetition Credit Agreements.\"The Plaintiffs tell Judge Gerber that they are not quite sureexactly what point the Investment Banks are trying to make.\"If they are saying that simply because they may be affiliates ofthe Banks, the Prepetition Credit Agreements entitle them toindemnification without regard to whether the underlying claimsrelate to those agreements, the [Plaintiffs] disagree and submitthere is no principled basis for the position. And if they aresaying that as holders of Bank Claims they are entitled toindemnification even as to claims arising out of theirunderwriting activities, there is similarly no merit to theargument,\" John H. Drucker, Esq., at Cole, Schotz, Meisel, Forman& Leonard, P.A., in New York, argues.The Class Action Plaintiffs never understood that the securitieslaw claims they assert against the Investment Banks in theSecurities Class Action relate to the Creditors Committee's HoldBack Motion and do not believe there is any credible, good faithargument that those claims could give rise to \"Bank Claims\", Mr.Drucker explains.Mr. Drucker informs the Court that if the Investment Banks pushthe issue in connection with the Hold Back Motion despite thetransparent lack of merit to any argument that claims relating tounderwriting activities are Bank Claims, it could materiallyimpact the third-party release issue under the ACOM Debtors' Planof Reorganization. This is because the Debtors would no doubtclaim that if the Bank Claims included underwriting claims and ifthose claims were indemnifiable, the Debtors' exposure to theBanks might be increased in amounts to create confirmationissues, Mr. Drucker says. Creditors Committee InsistsThe Creditors Committee insists that: (a) the Bank Lenders' entitlement to receive distributions on the Effective Date has not been \"settled\" because: -- the Government Settlement does not assure that the Bank Lenders will receive distributions on the Effective Date; and -- the ACOM Debtors' Plan of Reorganization does not \"settle\" the Bank Lenders' entitlement to Effective Date distribution; (b) Section 502(d) requires the Hold Back of the Bank Lenders' distributions; and (c) as a matter of law, the Bank Claims are not entitled to interest at the contract rate after the Effective Date.Based in Coudersport, Pa., Adelphia Communications Corporation --http://www.adelphia.com/-- is the fifth-largest cable television company in the country. Adelphia serves customers in 30 statesand Puerto Rico, and offers analog and digital video services,high-speed Internet access and other advanced services over itsbroadband networks. The Company and its more than 200 affiliatesfiled for Chapter 11 protection in the Southern District of NewYork on June 25, 2002. Those cases are jointly administered undercase number 02-41729. Willkie Farr & Gallagher represents theACOM Debtors. PricewaterhouseCoopers serves as the Debtors'financial advisor. Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, andKlee, Tuchin, Bogdanoff & Stern LLP represent the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditors. (Adelphia Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 134; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)ADELPHIA: Barbs on Multi-Mil. Suit with Devon Trustee Continues---------------------------------------------------------------Devon Mobile Communications Liquidating Trust and the ACOMDebtors stipulate that the Devon Trustee's complaint regardingACOM's breach of duty to fund operations is dismissed withprejudice. Each party bears its own costs. Motions for Summary JudgmentThe Liquidating Trustee assigned in Devon Mobile Communications'chapter 11 case asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York for a summary judgment that AdelphiaCommunications Corporation and its debtor-affiliates, as the alterego of Devon Mobile Communications, L.P., is liable to the DevonTrustee: -- for the $80,000,000 debt that the Devon Trustee is unable to pay; -- for $80,000,000 under the doctrine of deepening insolvency; -- for $53,046,674 on account of its receipt of fraudulent conveyances from Devon; -- for $53,046,674 as the result of its breach of the Agreement of Limited Partnership of Devon.In a separate pleading, the ACOM Debtors ask the Court forsummary judgment in their favor.Judge Morris denies the parties' summary judgment motions onfraudulent conveyance and breach of limited partnershipagreement. Judge Morris finds that material issues of fact existas to: -- whether the transfers made on August 31, 2001; October 26, 2001; November 23, 2001; December 7, 2001; and February 19, 2002, were returns of capital or repayment of undocumented intercompany loans; -- whether the transfer of the Florida License sale proceeds were an improper return of capital, or fraudulent conveyances; -- whether the funds were ultimately used to pay Devon's ongoing operating liabilities; -- whether the Devon Trustee received reasonably equivalent value for the transfers; and -- whether the Devon trustee was left undercapitalize by the transfers.The Court denies the Devon Trustee's request for summary judgmentin its entirety.The Court grants ACOM's request for summary judgment onfraudulent conveyance and breach of services agreement. TheCourt finds that as of February 7, 2002, the transfer of$22,100,000 was a transfer of funds initially provided by theACOM Debtors, and therefore did not diminish the Devon Trustee'sassets and could have not been a fraudulent conveyance or havecaused the Devon trustee any contract damages.On the deepening insolvency allegation, Judge Morris finds thatthe Devon Trustee failed to adequately allege that ACOM prolongedthe Devon Trustee's life in breach of a separate duty owed to theDevon Trustee or any of its constituency.Judge Morris also rules that the Devon Trustee does not havestanding to assert an alter ego claim against ACOM.In a separate order, Judge Morris denies in its entirety the ACOMDebtors' request for summary judgment with regards to itscounterclaims for breaches of contracts and agreements under theGeneral Dynamics Agreement where ACOM guaranteed Devon'sobligations: -- the General Dynamics Claim against ACOM for $34,908,731, plus consequential damages, interest, attorney's fees, costs and expenses in defending the Claim; -- $34,908,731 representing Devon's failure to indemnify ACOM under its implied obligation under the Partnership Agreement, plus consequential damages, interest, attorney's fees, costs and expenses in defending the General Dynamics Claim; and -- $34,908,731 in violation of Devon's equitable duty to indemnify ACOM, plus consequential damages, interest, attorneys' fees, costs and expenses incurred in defending the General Dynamics Claim. Motions in LimineThe Devon Trustee asks the Court to: a. preclude the ACOM Debtors' expert, Glenn Pomerantz, from testifying on subjects that the Devon Trustee was prevented from exploring at deposition; b. preclude Mr. Pomerantz from testifying at trial in support of the irrelevant theory that Devon could have survived by selling its PCS Licenses; c. limit the ACOM Debtors' evidence and argument in accordance with the limits they placed on their Rule 30(b)(6) depositions testimony; and d. exclude a certain expert, Susan M. Simmons, from testifying at trial to facts and opinions she failed to supply during her deposition.The ACOM Debtors ask the Court to deny the Devon Trustee'smotions in limine because: a. the Devon Trustee failed to follow the discovery rules governing discovery disputes; and b. their witnesses properly responded to deposition questions.Joanne B. Wills, Esq., at Klehr, Harrison, Harvey, Branzburg &Ellers LLP, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, asserts that themotions in limine are nothing more than a \"veiled discoverymotion.\" The Devon Trustee has needlessly wasted the Court's andthe ACOM Debtors' time with the motions in limine, Ms. Willssays.However, the Devon Trustee asserts that: -- it was not required to confer with the ACOM Debtors before filing the motions in limine; -- it gave the ACOM Debtors a full and fair opportunity to provide the required deposition testimony, which they have spurned; -- it is entitled to an order precluding Mr. Pomerantz from testifying: a. on subjects that it was prevented from exploring at deposition by ACOM Debtors' instructions not to answer; b. in support of his theory that Devon could have survived by selling its PCS Licenses; and -- it is entitled to an order limiting the ACOM Debtors' evidence and argument in accordance with the limits they placed on their Rule 30(b)(6)deposition testimony. Court Denies Motions in LimineFor reasons stated in open Court, Judge Morris denied the DevonTrustee's motions in limine. ACOM Debtors Amend CounterclaimsThe ACOM Debtors ask the Court to enter a declaratory judgment intheir favor that to the extent ACOM is required to pay any moniesto General Dynamics pursuant to ACOM's guarantee of Devon'sobligations to General Dynamics, ACOM is entitled to a dollar-to-dollar indemnification from the Liquidating Trust.The ACOM Debtors' counterclaims have been further amended toreflect that the ACOM Debtors assert counterclaims for breach andunjust enrichment under the Bridge Financing pursuant to theterms of the Limited Partnership Agreement: -- unpaid obligations under the Bridge Financing amounting to not less than: * $56,277,605; or * $106,277,605, if the Court determines that the Florida License Sale Proceeds were not used to pay Devon vendors for work and services provided by those vendors to Devon; and -- damages of: * $56,277,605; or * $106,277,605, if the Court determines that the Florida License Sale Proceeds were not used to pay Devon vendors for work and services provided by those vendors to Devon. Devon Trustee Answers ACOM's CounterclaimsThe Devon Mobile Communications Liquidating Trust asserts that: -- the ACOM Debtors fail to state a [counter]claim on which relief can be granted; -- the ACOM Debtors' counterclaims, if any are found to have merit, must be offset by amount that they took from Devon Mobile Communications, L.P.; -- the ACOM Debtors' counterclaims on the counts of: * breach of contract to the Devon L.P. Agreement, * breach of implied indemnity contract, * equitable indemnity, and * contribution, are barred in whole or in part because they: (1) are contingent claims for indemnification or contribution and are therefore disallowable pursuant to Section 502(e)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; and (2) are subrogated by any ACOM Debtors' unpaid amount of those claims, pursuant to Section 509(c). -- the ACOM Debtors' allegedly \"advanced\" funds should all be characterized as equity instead of debt, contrary to what the ACOM Debtors describe it; -- the ACOM Debtors' claims are barred, in whole or part, by the doctrine of equitable subordination pursuant to Section 510(c); -- the ACOM Debtors are obligated to the Devon Trustee thus entitling them to set-off, recoupment or other equitable rights; -- the ACOM Debtors' claims are barred, in whole or part, to the extent they were asserted after the Court-approved bar date; and -- the ACOM Debtors' claims are barred, in whole or part, because of the ACOM Debtors' inequitable conduct and of Devon being the alter ego and instrumentality of the ACOM Debtors.The ACOM Debtors ask the Court to strike the Devon Trustee'saffirmative defense asserting that the ACOM Debtors' claims arebarred because Devon was the alter ego and instrumentality of theACOM Debtors.Joanne B. Wills, Esq. at Klehr, Harrison, Harvey, Branzburg &Ellers LLP, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, argues that the DevonTrustee's assertion is a predicament on the same theory of asummary judgment that the Court had already granted to the ACOMDebtors. Judge Morris already ruled that the Devon Trustee doesnot have standing to bring that claim.Despite the summary judgment in favor of the ACOM Debtors, theDevon Trustee indicated that it will press its affirmativedefense at trial, Ms. Wills relates.Ms. Wills further asserts that the Devon Trustee will prejudicethe ACOM Debtors by forcing it to defend at trial against a claimon which it has already prevailed at summary judgment.For reasons stated in open court, the Court denied the ACOMDebtors' request to strike that affirmative defense asserted bythe Devon Trustee. Joint Pretrial OrderPursuant to a Joint Pretrial Order, the parties agree that: * As of April 3, 2006, the Devon Trustee asserts claims for: (a) $50,760,000 on account of these transfers, as amended, which may be avoided as fraudulent conveyances: Payment Date Payment Amount ------------ -------------- 08/03/01 $3,000,000 08/10/01 33,000,000 08/30/01 975,000 10/04/01 13,500,000 10/26/01 40,000 11/23/01 20,000 12/07/01 130,000 02/20/02 95,000 (b) the same $50,760,000 as damages arising from the ACOM Debtors' material breaches of the Limited Partnership Agreement. * As of April 3, 2006, the ACOM Debtors assert counterclaims: (a) for breach and unjust enrichment under the Services Agreement dated December 29, 2000: -- service fees of not less than $2,000,000; -- consolidated purchase fees of not less than $5,315,351; and (b) for breach and unjust enrichment under the Bridge Financing pursuant to the terms of the Limited Partnership Agreement: -- unpaid obligations under the Bridge Financing amounting to not less than $56,277,605; and -- $50,011,488 in damages. (c) for breach and unjust enrichment under a brokerage fee agreement in connection with the purchase and sale of certain Devon FCC Licenses, brokerage fees for $1,440,000 relating to the sale of the Fort Pierce license; and (d) for obligations relating to a contract for the provision of telephone services entered into with ACC Telecommunication of VA, in which Devon failed to pay the invoiced charges: -- $1,701,818 in damages plus consequential damages, interest, and costs for the breach; and -- $1,701,818 for damages representing Devon's unjust enrichment. * In connection with the indemnity provisions of the Devon L.P. Agreement, the General Dynamics Agreement, and the General Dynamics Guaranty; Devon's equitable duty of indemnity; and Devon's contribution obligation under the General Dynamics Agreement and the General Dynamics Guaranty, the ACOM Debtors ask the Court: (a) for a declaratory judgment of their right to indemnification with the indemnification amount to be determined through the adjudication of the General Dynamics claim in the ACOM Debtors' claims resolution process; and (b) to award them attorneys' fees, costs and expenses incurred in defending the General Dynamics ACC Claim.Based in Coudersport, Pa., Adelphia Communications Corporation --http://www.adelphia.com/-- is the fifth-largest cable television company in the country. Adelphia serves customers in 30 statesand Puerto Rico, and offers analog and digital video services,high-speed Internet access and other advanced services over itsbroadband networks. The Company and its more than 200 affiliatesfiled for Chapter 11 protection in the Southern District of NewYork on June 25, 2002. Those cases are jointly administered undercase number 02-41729. Willkie Farr & Gallagher represents theACOM Debtors. PricewaterhouseCoopers serves as the Debtors'financial advisor. Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, andKlee, Tuchin, Bogdanoff & Stern LLP represent the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditors. (Adelphia Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 134; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)ADELPHIA COMMS: TCR Sports Wants FCC to Condition Sale to Comcast-----------------------------------------------------------------David C. Frederick, Esq., at Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans& Figel, P.L.L.C., in Washington, D.C., representing TCR SportsBroadcasting Holding, L.L.P., tells the Federal CommunicationsCommission that the sale of substantially all of AdelphiaCommunications Corporation's assets to Time Warner, Inc., andComcast Corporation should not proceed without significantconditions placed on it.In a letter dated May 16, 2006, Mr. Frederick reminded the FCCthat TCR Sports argued that Comcast had \"improperly[discriminated] against TCR in an effort to undo TCR's agreementwith [Major League Baseball] to obtain the broadcast rights forthe [Washington Nationals baseball team games] for Comcast'swholly owned subsidiary.\" TCR Sports further argued that thediscrimination reflected not only Comcast's effort to favor itsown affiliate but also its desire to extend its monopoly positionin the multi-channel video programming distributor market.According to the Associated Press, Comcast is refusing to carryMid-Atlantic Sports Network, the registered trade name of TCRSports, because of a dispute with Peter Angelos arising from hisplans to move Baltimore Orioles baseball team games telecasts toMASN after its deal with Comcast expires.Mr. Angelos, the owner of the Baltimore Orioles, controls MASN.Mr. Frederick argues that Comcast's proposed acquisition of ACOMwould only increase Comcast's incentive and ability to carry outthose program carriage discriminations.Based on a letter dated April 6, 2006, from Comcast's President,Stephen B. Burke, to MLB Commissioner Allah H. Selig, Mr.Frederick notes that Comcast has expressly proposed to MLB that: -- the 2005 agreement between the Baltimore Orioles baseball team and MLB be \"terminate[d]\"; -- the Nationals receive local television rights contrary to that agreement; and -- Comcast broadcast Nationals' games, presumably via its affiliated regional sports network, Comcast SportsNet.Mr. Frederick informs FCC that the demands demonstrate in clearterms that Comcast's objective is to acquire exclusive access tovaluable regional sports programming, thus, advancing interestsof its affiliated regional sports network while solidifying itsmonopoly position in the MVPD market at the same time.Mr. Frederick also notes that Mr. Burke's letter demonstratesthat Comcast has no legitimate business justification for itsfailure to carry TCR Sports and that Comcast's conduct can beexplained only as an unlawful discrimination.Mr. Frederick also informs the FCC that at a congressionalhearing on April 17, David L. Cohen, Comcast's executive vicepresident, emphasized that Comcast's aim was to undo the 2005agreements between TCR Sports and MLB.Mr. Frederick also refers the FCC to a letter dated April 17,2006, from Mr. Cohen to Mr. Angelos in which Mr. Cohen confirmsthat Comcast will not agree to carry TCR Sports' programming ofNationals games unless TCR Sports agrees to abrogate itsMarch 28, 2005, agreement with MLB.Mr. Frederick relates that meetings between the officials of TCRSports and Comcast resulted in no carriage agreement becauseComcast refused to even discuss the terms of carriage unless TCRSports either: -- gives Comcast equity in the network that produces Nationals games; or -- abrogates its agreement with MLB.Mr. Frederick concludes that the ACOM Sale Transaction willincrease Comcast's incentives and power to use its dominantpositions in both the regional sports programming market in themid-Atlantic and the cable distribution network to harm competingnon-affiliated regional sports networks, like TCR Sports, andrival MVPD distributions.Accordingly, TCR Sports asks the FCC to amend the terms ofconditions in the event that FCC approves the ACOM SaleTransaction.Based in Coudersport, Pa., Adelphia Communications Corporation --http://www.adelphia.com/-- is the fifth-largest cable television company in the country. Adelphia serves customers in 30 statesand Puerto Rico, and offers analog and digital video services,high-speed Internet access and other advanced services over itsbroadband networks. The Company and its more than 200 affiliatesfiled for Chapter 11 protection in the Southern District of NewYork on June 25, 2002. Those cases are jointly administered undercase number 02-41729. Willkie Farr & Gallagher represents theACOM Debtors. PricewaterhouseCoopers serves as the Debtors'financial advisor. Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, andKlee, Tuchin, Bogdanoff & Stern LLP represent the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditors. (Adelphia Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 134; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)ADVANCED COMMS: Posts $284,621 Net Loss in 2006 3rd Fiscal Quarter------------------------------------------------------------------Advanced Communications Technologies, Inc., filed its thirdquarter financial statements for the three months ended March 31,2006, with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 19, 2006.The Company reported a $284,621 net loss on $2,552,055 of revenuesfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $4,916,779in total assets, $2,702,465 in total liabilities, and $2,214,314in stockholders' equity.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $1,659,563 in total current assets available to pay$2,514,727 in total current liabilities coming due within the next12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a13 Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Dec. 2, 2005,Weinberg & Company, PA, expressed substantial doubt about AdvancedCommunications Technologies, Inc.'s ability to continue as a goingconcern after auditing the Company's financial statements for thefiscal years ended June 30, 2005, and 2004. The auditing firmpointed to the Company's net loss and negative cash flow fromoperations.Based in New York, Advanced Communications Technologies, Inc.,specializes in the technology aftermarket service and supplychain, known as reverse logistics. Its wholly owned subsidiaryand principal operating unit, Encompass Group Affiliates, Inc.,acquires and operates businesses that provide computer andelectronics repair and end-of-life cycle services.AH-DH APARTMENTS: Hires McGuire Craddock as Bankruptcy Counsel--------------------------------------------------------------AH-DH Apartments, Ltd., and its debtor-affiliates obtainedauthority from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern Districtof Texas to employ McGuire, Craddock & Strother, P.C., as theirbankruptcy counsel.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 20, 2006,the Debtors told the Court that DB Holdings, LLC, a debtor-affiliate that filed for bankruptcy protection on April 10, 2006,will employ its own bankruptcy counsel.The Debtors told the Court that McGuire Craddock is expected toperform legal services necessary during their chapter 11 cases.The Debtors disclosed that the Firm's professionals bill: Professional Hourly Rate ------------ ----------- Partners $250 - $350 Associates $175 - $235The lead counsel for this engagement, J. Mark Chevallier, Esq.,bills $320 per hour. The Debtors inform the Court that DalcorRealty, LLC, a direct or indirect equity owner of each of theDebtors, has paid the Firm a $160,000 retainer.Mr. Chevallier assured the Court that his firm is a \"disinterestedperson\" as the term is defined in Section 101(14) of theBankruptcy Code and does not hold or represent any interestadverse to the Debtors' estates.Headquartered in Plano, Texas, AH-DH Apartments, Ltd., owns 16apartment complexes. The company and three of its affiliatesfiled for chapter 11 protection on Mar. 22, 2006 (Bank. E.D. Tex.Case No. 06-40355). J. Mark Chevallier, Esq., at McGuire Craddock& Strother, P.C., represents the Debtors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they estimated assets anddebts between $50 million and $100 million.DH Holdings Limited Partnership and DH Holdings GP, Inc., filedfor chapter 11 protection on Apr. 8, 2006 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. CaseNos. 06-40479 and 06-40480). Another affiliate, DB Holdings, LLC,filed for chapter 11 protection on Apr. 10, 2006 (Bankr. E.D. Tex.Case No. 06-40484). The Debtors' chapter 11 cases are jointlyadministered under Case No. 06-40355.AH-DH APARTMENTS: DB Holdings Taps PronskePatel as Bankr. Counsel-----------------------------------------------------------------DB Holdings, LLC, a debtor-affiliate of AH-DH Apartments, Ltd.,asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Texasfor authority to employ Pronske & Patel, P.C. as its bankruptcycounsel.PronskePatel will: (a) provide legal advice with respect to Debtor's powers and duties as debtor in possession in the continued operation of its business and the management of its property; (b) take all necessary action to protect and preserve the Debtor's estate, including the prosecution of actions on behalf of the Debtor, the defense of any actions commenced against the Debtor, negotiations concerning litigation in which the Debtor is involved, and objections to claims filed against the Debtor's estate; (c) prepare on behalf of the Debtor all necessary motions, answers, orders, reports, and other legal papers in connection with the administration of its estate herein; (d) assist the Debtor in preparing for and filing one or more disclosure statements in accordance with Section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code; (e) assist the Debtor in preparing for and filing one or more plans of reorganization at the earliest possible date; (f) perform any and all other legal services for the Debtor in connection with the Chapter 11 case; and (g) perform such legal services as the Debtor may request with respect to any matter, including, but not limited to, corporate finance and governance, contracts, antitrust, labor, and tax.Gerrit M. Pronske, Esq., a partner at PronskePatel, discloses thathe bills $500 per hour and Rakhee V. Patel, Esq., also a partnerat PronskePatel, bills $290 per hour. Mr. Pronske furtherdiscloses that the Firm's professionals bill: Professional Hourly Rate ------------ ----------- Partners $500 - $290 Legal Assistants $130Mr. Pronske assures the Court that his firm is a \"disinterestedperson\" as the term is defined in Section 101(14) of theBankruptcy Code and does not hold or represent any interestadverse to the Debtors' estates.Headquartered in Plano, Texas, AH-DH Apartments, Ltd., owns 16apartment complexes. The company and three of its affiliatesfiled for chapter 11 protection on Mar. 22, 2006 (Bank. E.D. Tex.Case No. 06-40355). J. Mark Chevallier, Esq., at McGuire Craddock& Strother, P.C., represents the Debtors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they estimated assets anddebts between $50 million and $100 million.DH Holdings Limited Partnership and DH Holdings GP, Inc., filedfor chapter 11 protection on Apr. 8, 2006 (Bankr. E.D. Tex. CaseNos. 06-40479 and 06-40480). Another affiliate, DB Holdings, LLC,filed for chapter 11 protection on Apr. 10, 2006 (Bankr. E.D. Tex.Case No. 06-40484). The Debtors' chapter 11 cases are jointlyadministered under Case No. 06-40355.AIR CANADA: Settles Misconduct Litigation with Westjet Airlines---------------------------------------------------------------In 2003-2004, certain members of WestJet Airlines Ltd. managementengaged in an extensive practice of covertly accessing a passwordprotected proprietary employee web site maintained by Air CanadaInc. to download detailed and commercially sensitive informationwithout authorization or consent from Air Canada. This practicewas undertaken with the knowledge and direction of the highestmanagement levels of WestJet and was not halted until discoveredby Air Canada.This conduct was both unethical and unacceptable and WestJetaccepts full responsibility for such misconduct. WestJetsincerely regrets having engaged in this practice and unreservedlyapologizes to Air Canada and Mr. Robert Milton.As a full settlement, WestJet has agreed to pay Air Canada'sinvestigation and litigation costs of $5.5 million and hasaccepted Air Canada's request that WestJet make a donation in theamount of $10 million in the name of Air Canada and WestJet tochildren's charities across the country.Air Canada has accepted WestJet's apology and withdrawn its claimsin light of this settlement. All legal proceedings between theparties have been terminated. Both parties have expressed adesire to turn the page on this unfortunate chapter with finalityand are pleased that children's charities across Canada will alsobenefit from this settlement arrangement. About WestjetWestJet Airlines Ltd. -- http://www.westjet.com/-- was founded in 1996 by Clive Beddoe, Mark Hill, Tim Morgan and Donald Bell, fourCalgary entrepreneurs who saw an opportunity to provide low fareair travel across western Canada. The airline operates a fleet ofBoeing aircraft featuring new Next-Generation 737 aircraft withleather seats and more legroom. Transborder service commenced inthe fall of 2004 to the cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco,Phoenix, Fort Lauderdale, Tampa, Orlando, and New York. Serviceto Palm Springs began in January 2005. WestJet is publicly tradedon the Toronto Stock Exchange under the symbol WJA. About Air CanadaAir Canada -- http://www.aircanada.com/-- together with Air Canada Jazz and other business units of parent company ACEAviation Holdings Inc. provide scheduled and charter airtransportation for passengers and cargo to more than 150destinations, vacation packages to over 90 destinations, as wellas maintenance, ground handling and training services to otherairlines.Canada's flag carrier is recognized as a leader in the global airtransportation market by pursuing a strategy based on value-addedcustomer service, technical excellence and passenger safety. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 24, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised the long-term corporatecredit rating on ACE Aviation Holdings Inc. to 'B+' from 'B',while affirming the 'B' long-term corporate credit rating on itswholly owned subsidiary, Air Canada. The outlook on both entitiesremains stable.ALLIED HOLDINGS: Court Approves 4th Amendment to DIP Loan Pact--------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgiaapproved the Fourth Amendment to Allied Holdings, Inc.'s CreditAgreement with General Electric Capital Corporation, MorganStanley Senior Funding, Inc., Marathon Structured Financing Fund,L.P., GECC Capital Markets Group, Inc., and other lenders.The Court also approves the Consent Agreement between the Debtorsand the lenders. The Consent Agreement extends until May 30,2006, the date by which Allied is required to deliver to theLenders the Company's audited financial statements for the fiscalyear ended December 31, 2005, and other related deliveriesrequired under the terms of the DIP Facility.In addition, the Court overruled the Objections filed by theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors against certain terms ofthe amendment.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 16, 2006, theCommittee asserted that any amendment to the Debtors' DIP FacilityAgreement should: * resolve existing defaults; * not expand the scope -- and increase the amount -- of prepayment premiums; * not force the Debtors to obtain additional financing without adequate justification; * not place the Debtors at risk of default; and * assure that all future benchmarks are likely to be attainable.New advances must also not be subject to the Default Rate ofInterest, Richard B. Herzog, Jr., Esq., at Nelson Mullins Riley &Scarborough, LLP, in Atlanta, Georgia, asserted.Mr. Herzog informed the Court that the Debtors' Fourth Amendmentto their Credit Agreement and Loan Documents extends theprepayment premium to Term Loan A, Term Loan B, the ProtectiveOveradvance, or all three. The Amendment does not guarantee theDebtors any additional funding. It merely provides for additionaladvances \"up to $5,000,000\" to be advanced by the Term Loan BAgent \"in its discretion,\" Mr. Herzog said.To obtain approval of the Fourth Amendment, the Committee askedthe Court to require the Debtors to show whether: 1) the proposed financing is an exercise of sound and reasonable business judgment; 2) alternative financing is available on any other basis; 3) the proposed financing is in the best interest of the estates and their creditors; 4) any better offers, bids, or timely proposals are before the Court; 5) the proposed financing is necessary to preserve the assets of the estates, and is necessary, essential and appropriate for the continued operation of the Debtors' businesses; 6) the terms of proposed financing are fair, reasonable and adequate, given the circumstances of the Debtors and their postpetition lenders; and 7) the financing agreement was negotiated in good faith and at arm's-length between the Debtors and their postpetition lenders.Headquartered in Decatur, Georgia, Allied Holdings, Inc. (OTC PinkSheets: AHIZQ.PK) -- http://www.alliedholdings.com/-- and its affiliates provide short-haul services for original equipmentmanufacturers and provide logistical services. The Companyand 22 of its affiliates filed for chapter 11 protection onJuly 31, 2005 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Case Nos. 05-12515 through05-12537). Jeffrey W. Kelley, Esq., at Troutman Sanders, LLP,represents the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Henry S.Miller at Miller Buckfire & Co., LLC, serves as the Debtors'financial advisor. Anthony J. Smits, Esq., at Bingham McCutchenLLP, provides the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors withlegal advice and Russell A. Belinsky at Chanin Capital Partners,LLC, provides financial advisory services to the Committee. Whenthe Debtors filed for protection from their creditors, theyestimated more than $100 million in assets and debts. (AlliedHoldings Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 22; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)ALLIED HOLDINGS: Inks Amended Delivery Agreement with Honda----------------------------------------------------------- Allied Holdings, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates ask the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia forpermission to assume an Amended Agreement with American HondaMotor Co., Inc., effective as of May 19, 2006.Allied Systems, Ltd., and Honda entered into a motortransportation contract in April 2002. Pursuant to the Agreement,Allied Systems provides delivery and transportation services toHonda in return for which Honda makes payments in accordance withagreed rate terms.In January 2006, the parties amended the Agreement to reflect,among others, modifications to rate terms, a fuel surchargeprovision, and an extension to the original term.Thomas R. Walker, Esq., at Troutman Sanders LLP, in Atlanta,Georgia, notes that the Debtors have provided the terms of theAgreement, as amended, to counsel for the Debtors' postpetitionlenders and counsel for the Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors, subject to confidentiality agreements. Upon request,the Debtors will provide a copy of the Second Amendment to theCourt for in camera review.Mr. Walker says the terms of the Amendment are fair and favorableto the Debtors. The Amended Agreement will be also be valuableto the Debtors' ongoing business operations.\"By extending the Agreement and modifying rate terms, theAmendment will provide Allied Systems with increased revenue flowstarting in April 2006 and continuing through the followingyears,\" Mr. Walker explains.The Debtors' request must be approved because they have met thestandard required to assume an executory contract, Mr. Walkertells Judge Mullins.Headquartered in Decatur, Georgia, Allied Holdings, Inc. (OTC PinkSheets: AHIZQ.PK) -- http://www.alliedholdings.com/-- and its affiliates provide short-haul services for original equipmentmanufacturers and provide logistical services. The Companyand 22 of its affiliates filed for chapter 11 protection onJuly 31, 2005 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Case Nos. 05-12515 through05-12537). Jeffrey W. Kelley, Esq., at Troutman Sanders, LLP,represents the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Henry S.Miller at Miller Buckfire & Co., LLC, serves as the Debtors'financial advisor. Anthony J. Smits, Esq., at Bingham McCutchenLLP, provides the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors withlegal advice and Russell A. Belinsky at Chanin Capital Partners,LLC, provides financial advisory services to the Committee. Whenthe Debtors filed for protection from their creditors, theyestimated more than $100 million in assets and debts. (AlliedHoldings Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 22; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)AMERICAN ACHIEVEMENT: Restates 2005 Annual Report-------------------------------------------------American Achievement Corporation and AAC Group Holding Corp.determined that the financial statements included in the Company'sQuarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended Feb. 25,2006, and Nov. 26, 2005, and Annual Report on Form 10-K for theyear ended Aug. 27, 2005, should no longer be relied upon becauseof the need to restate the financial statements.The restatements correct the revenue recognition policy for classring and certain graduation products sales through independentsales representatives to recognize revenue at the time rings andcertain graduation products are delivered to the student customerrather than at the time rings and certain graduation products areshipped to the independent sales representatives.The restatements result in a deferral of previously recognizedrevenue and related selling costs from the date of shipment ofrings and certain graduation products to sales representatives tothe date of delivery of these products to the student customer.Full-text copies of the amended financial statements are availablefor free at: the year ended Aug. 27, 2005 http://researcharchives.com/t/s?9f7 quarterly report ended Nov. 26, 2005 http://researcharchives.com/t/s?9f8 quarterly report ended Feb. 25, 2006 http://researcharchives.com/t/s?9f9Austin, Texas-based American Achievement Corporation -- http://www.cbi-rings.com/-- provides products associated with graduation and important event commemoration, with a legacy basedon the delivery of exceptionally well-crafted products, includingclass rings, yearbooks, graduation products, achievementpublications and affinity jewelry through in-school and retaildistribution. AAC's premier brands include: Balfour andArtCarved, providers of class rings and graduation products; ECI,publisher of Who's Who Among American High School Students(R);Keepsake Fine Jewelry; and Taylor Publishing, publisher ofyearbooks. AAC has over 2,000 employees and is majority-owned byFenway Partners. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 4, 2006,Moody's Investors Service upgraded AAC Group Holding Corp.'scorporate family rating to B1 from B2 and American AchievementCorporation's senior secured credit facilities to Ba3 from B1 andits senior subordinated notes to B2 from B3. Moody's alsoaffirmed the Caa1 rating for AAC Group Holding Corp.'s seniordiscount notes.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on March 17, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its bank loan ratingfor American Achievement Corp. to 'BB-' from 'B+', and raised therecovery rating to '1' from '3'.AMERICAN CELLULAR: To Purchase Highland Cellular for $95 Million----------------------------------------------------------------American Cellular Corporation, a subsidiary of DobsonCommunications Corporation, agreed to purchase Highland CellularLLC, which provides cellular wireless service to southern WestVirginia and two adjacent counties in Virginia. The market isprimarily south of markets that Dobson owns and operates in WestVirginia, southern Ohio and Pennsylvania, and western Maryland.The $95 million purchase is subject to customary closingconditions and approval by the Federal Communications Commission,which Dobson expects to gain in the second half of 2006.Highland serves approximately 51,000 subscribers, and its markethas a population of approximately 352,000, which will nearlydouble Dobson's market population in West Virginia. The purchaseincludes 25 MHz of 850 MHz spectrum over West Virginia 7 RSA,McDowell and Wyoming counties in WV 6 RSA, and Bland and Tazewellcounties in Virginia 2 RSA. Beckley and Bluefield are the twolargest cities in the region, which also includes the southernportion of the Monongahela National Forest.Highland has been operating its markets since 1991 under the brandname of Cellular One(R), the brand name owned and used by DobsonCommunications. Highland provides GSM, TDMA and analog wirelessservice on a network that includes 75 cell sites, eight of whichare company-owned.Highland also owns PCS spectrum over West Virginia 5 RSA, McDowelland Wyoming counties in WV 6 RSA, most of WV 7 RSA, and sixadditional, adjacent counties in VirginiaHeadquartered in Oklahoma City, American Cellular Corp. (Nasdaq:DCEL) -- http://www.americancellular.net/-- is a rural and suburban provider of wireless communications services in theUnited States. The company provides wireless telephone service inportions of Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, NewYork, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Wisconsin.The company offers digital voice, data and other feature servicesto subscribers through Global System for Mobile Communications,General Packet Radio Service, Enhanced Data for GSM Evolution, andTime Division Multiple Access, digital networks. At Dec. 31,2005, the company's wireless telephone systems covered a totalpopulation of 5.2 million and had approximately 669,700subscribers with an aggregate market penetration of 13.0%.American Cellular's 10% Senior Notes due 2011 carry Standard &Poor's B- rating.APPLETON PAPERS: Solicits Consents to Amend Senior Notes Contract-----------------------------------------------------------------Appleton Papers Inc. commenced, on May 26, 2006, a consentsolicitation to amend certain provisions of the indenturesgoverning its 8.125% Senior Notes due 2011 and 9.75% SeniorSubordinated Notes due 2014.The proposed amendments will permit Appleton to make distributionsto Paperweight Development Corp., the parent company of Appleton,to allow Paperweight to make certain payments that are required byAppleton's employee stock ownership plan and applicable laws, andto make other related changes to the restricted payments covenantand the definitions in the each of the indentures.The consent solicitation is scheduled to expire at 11:59 p.m., NewYork City time, on June 9, 2006, unless extended.The proposed amendments to each indenture will require, on orprior to the expiration date, the consent of note holders of atleast a majority in aggregate principal amount of each of thesenior notes and senior subordinated notes that are outstanding asof May 25, 2006.In consideration of the holders' consent to the proposedamendments, Appleton is offering to make a cash payment of $10 foreach $1,000 principal amount of notes held as of May 25, 2006, forwhich consents have been received prior to the expiration date andnot validly revoked.Additional information concerning the terms and conditions of theconsent solicitation and copies of the Consent SolicitationStatement and related documents may be obtained from theinformation agent: Global Bondholders Services Corporation 65 Broadway, Suite 723 New York, New York 10006 Telephone (212) 430-3774 (banks and brokers) Toll Free (866) 952-2200Questions regarding the consent solicitation may be directed to: UBS Securities LLC Attn: Liability Management Group Telephone (203) 719-4210 Toll Free at (888) 722-9555 ext. 4210 About AppletonHeadquartered in the Appleton, Wisconsin, Appleton Papers Inc. -- http://www.appletonideas.com/-- uses ideas that make a difference to create product solutions through its development and use ofcoating formulations and applications as well as encapsulation,security, printing and packaging technologies. The Companyproduces carbonless, thermal, security, and performance packagingproducts and provides secure and specialized print services.Appleton has manufacturing operations in Wisconsin, Ohio,Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and the United Kingdom, employsapproximately 3,300 people, and is 100% employee-owned.ARMSTRONG WORLD: Parent Company Earns $28 Million in First Quarter------------------------------------------------------------------Armstrong Holdings, Inc., the parent company of Armstrong WorldIndustries, Inc., disclosed its financial results for the firstquarter ended March 31, 2006, to the Securities and ExchangeCommission on April 26, 2006.For the year ended March 31, 2006, the Company reported $28million of net income on $876.6 million of net revenues, comparedto a $3 million net loss on $840.7 million of net revenues for theyear ended Dec. 31, 2005.As of March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed totalassets of $4.6 billion and total debts of $5.9 billion, resultingin $1.3 billion stockholders' deficit.A full-text copy of Armstrong Holdings' Quarterly Report isavailable for free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a1e About Armstrong WorldHeadquartered in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Armstrong WorldIndustries, Inc. -- http://www.armstrong.com/-- the major operating subsidiary of Armstrong Holdings, Inc., designs,manufactures and sells interior floor coverings and ceilingsystems, around the world.The Company and its debtor-affiliates filed for chapter 11protection on December 6, 2000 (Bankr. Del. Case No. 00-04469).Stephen Karotkin, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, and RussellC. Silberglied, Esq., at Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.,represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. The Debtorstapped the Feinberg Group for analysis, evaluation, and treatmentof personal injury asbestos claims.Mark Felger, Esq. and David Carickhoff, Esq., at Cozen andO'Connor, and Robert Drain, Esq., Andrew Rosenberg, Esq., andAlexander Rohan, Esq., at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton &Garrison, represent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.The Creditors Committee tapped Houlihan Lokey for financial andinvestment advice. The Official Committee of Asbestos PersonalInjury Claimant hired Ashby & Geddes as counsel.When the Debtors filed for protection from their creditors, theylisted $4,032,200,000 in total assets and $3,296,900,000 inliabilities.ASARCO LLC: FCR & Asbestos Panel Balks at Estimation Protocol-------------------------------------------------------------Robert C. Pate, Future Claims Representative, informs the Courtthat since the approval of the Stipulation realigning the partiesin the Adversary Proceeding, ASARCO LLC has asked for approval ofan estimation protocol in connection with its derivativeasbestos-related liabilities.The FCR asserts that Phase I of the Estimation Motion is ashocking reversal and is duplicative of the Adversary Proceeding.Debra L. Innocenti, Esq., at Oppenheimer, Blend, Harrison, &Tate, Inc., at San Antonio, Texas, points out that both Phase Iand the Estimation Motion seek determination of ASARCO'sderivative liability for asbestos claims against its AsbestosSubsidiary Debtors.Ms. Innocenti argues that since ASARCO has already filed aComplaint, ASARCO has already joined the issues presented in theEstimation Motion and has selected the forum and proceduralvehicle for litigating the derivative asbestos claims, and nocompelling reason exists to abandon that selection.According to the \"first filed rule,\" where two actions involvingoverlapping issues and parties are pending in two federal courts,there is a strong presumption that favors the forum of the first-filed suit.In addition, Ms. Innocenti contends that ASARCO's sudden desireto move ahead towards confirmation with alacrity is artificial.ASARCO must resolve a number of more important challenges beforeit will be in a position to propose a plan of reorganization toits creditors. A determination of ASARCO's derivative asbestosliability is not the most significant impediment to ASARCO'sprogress in its Chapter 11 case, Ms. Innocenti argues. If itwere, ASARCO should have proceeded with greater urgency in theprosecution of the Adversary Proceeding, which has been on filefor nearly 10 months.By attempting to dispose of the alter ego claims in anaccelerated and abbreviated fashion, ASARCO is asking thoseclaimants to fight this litigation not only with \"both hands tiedbehind their backs, but blindfolded and with both legs hobbledfor good measure,\" Ms. Innocenti says.If the FCR determines that he must participate in the riggedcontest, Ms. Innocenti says, the FCR will join with noinstitutional knowledge, no formal discovery and limited informalfact development. The proposed shotgun schedule is inadequateand unjust considering that the FCR has not been able to conductany investigation beyond procuring public documents, to shedlight on which witnesses should be called, Ms. Innocenti asserts.If the FCR determines that he must not participate in the riggedcontest, any resulting order finding that no alter ego liabilityexists would not bind future asbestos claimants. The FCR isspecifically appointed for the purposes of due process -- toprotect the rights and interests of future claimants, ensuringthere will be assets available in the future to pay future andunknown claims on relative par with current claimants.In light of ASARCO's attempt to short change the future claimantsof a meaningful discovery and litigation process for their alterego claims, it appears that to adequately represent the futureasbestos claimants, the FCR may need to decline to participate inPhase I of the estimation hearing, Ms. Innocenti says.Regardless of whether the FCR participates, ASARCO's estate willlikely have a Pyrrhic victory in a judgment by the Court findingthat no alter ego exists, Ms. Innocenti asserts. The judgmentwill have no binding authority on future asbestos claimants ifthe FCR does not participate in the proposed estimation hearingand will likely be overturned as an exploitive, collusiveproceeding that did not afford future asbestos claimants trulyzealous representation if the FCR does not participate. The onlycertain outcome will be a waste of judicial resources and theDebtors' estates. Asbestos CommitteeNotwithstanding the Parties' expressed intent that the resolutionof the Alter Ego Theories asserting that ASARCO is liable for theasbestos liabilities of the Asbestos Subsidiary Debtors wouldtake place through the current Adversary Proceeding, ASARCOaltered its position by filing the Estimation Motion, Jacob L.Newton, Esq., at Stutzman, Bromberg, Esserman & Plifka, APC, inDallas, Texas, notes.Mr. Newton asserts that the proposed Estimation Motion attemptsto short-circuit the current adversary proceeding and deny theAsbestos Committee's constituents their right to a meaningful dayin court.The proposed estimation procedures deny the Plaintiffs theprocedural protections, and place the current adversaryproceeding on a fast track -- a track so fast as to deny all dueprocess rights to the Debtors' asbestos claimants.Mr. Newton adds that ASARCO's proposed Phase I schedule of theEstimation Motion gives the Asbestos Committee and the FCR notime to conduct discovery, an omission that is particularlyunfair since the Asbestos Committee has outstanding requests forproduction of documents to ASARCO that have remained unsatisfiedsince October 2004.In proffering procedures that give the Plaintiffs only six weeksto conduct any discovery and in limiting the Plaintiffs to onlythree witnesses, Mr. Newton says, ASARCO is effectively forcingthe Asbestos Committee and the FCR to pick among the variouslegal theories that ASARCO itself has identified as potentiallyvalid.Mr. Newton also asserts that asbestos victims, who have beenstayed from pursuing recovery for their injuries based onASARCO's bankruptcy petition, deserve nothing less than a full,non-truncated trial of the merits of their claims against ASARCO,including the full gamut of procedural and due process rights.While the Asbestos Committee recognizes the Debtors' need toobtain a reliable estimate of their asbestos liabilities, theAsbestos Committee asserts that a typical asbestos estimationproceeding, using the Debtors' pre-bankruptcy asbestos historyand expert projections of present and future liabilities, is theoptimal method for determining the scope of the Debtors' asbestosliabilities.Headquartered in Tucson, Arizona, ASARCO LLC -- http://www.asarco.com/-- is an integrated copper mining, smelting and refining company. Grupo Mexico S.A. de C.V. isASARCO's ultimate parent. The Company filed for chapter 11protection on Aug. 9, 2005 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 05-21207).James R. Prince, Esq., Jack L. Kinzie, Esq., and Eric A.Soderlund, Esq., at Baker Botts L.L.P., and Nathaniel PeterHolzer, Esq., Shelby A. Jordan, Esq., and Harlin C. Womble, Esq.,at Jordan, Hyden, Womble & Culbreth, P.C., represent the Debtorin its restructuring efforts. Lehman Brothers Inc. provides theASARCO with financial advisory services and investment bankingservices. Paul M. Singer, Esq., James C. McCarroll, Esq., andDerek J. Baker, Esq., at Reed Smith LLP give legal advice tothe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and David J.Beckman at FTI Consulting, Inc., gives financial advisoryservices to the Committee. When the Debtor filed for protectionfrom its creditors, it listed $600 million in total assets and$1 billion in total debts.The Debtor has five affiliates that filed for chapter 11protection on April 11, 2005 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case Nos. 05-20521through 05-20525). They are Lac d'Amiante Du Quebec Ltee, CAPCOPipe Company, Inc., Cement Asbestos Products Company, LakeAsbestos of Quebec, Ltd., and LAQ Canada, Ltd. Details abouttheir asbestos-driven chapter 11 filings have appeared in theTroubled Company Reporter since Apr. 18, 2005.Encycle/Texas, Inc. (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 05-21304), Encycle,Inc., and ASARCO Consulting, Inc. (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No.05-21346) also filed for chapter 11 protection, and ASARCO hasasked that the three subsidiary cases be jointly administeredwith its chapter 11 case. On Oct. 24, 2005, Encycle/Texas' casewas converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation proceeding. The Courtappointed Michael Boudloche as Encycle/Texas, Inc.'s Chapter 7Trustee. Michael B. Schmidt, Esq., and John Vardeman, Esq., atLaw Offices of Michael B. Schmidt represent the Chapter 7Trustee. (ASARCO Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 22; BankruptcyCreditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000).ASARCO LLC: Alvarez & Marsal Okayed as Fin'l & Turnaround Advisor-----------------------------------------------------------------Judge Schmidt of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of Texas in Corpus Christi authorizes ASARCO LLC toemploy Alvarez & Marsal LLC as its financial and restructuringadvisors on an interim basis.ASARCO's Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has untilJune 1, 2006, to file an objection. If the Committee does notfile a timely objection, the Court's Order will become final.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 11, 2006,Alvarez & Marsal will provide consulting services to ASARCO'sBoard of Directors under a two-phase program: A. Phase I * Assist ASARCO in cash flow forecasting, management and reporting, business plan analysis and forecasting, development of financial, accounting and operational information and reports and other business management and bankruptcy case administration issues; * Evaluate financial, accounting, purchasing and supply chain, tax, commercial and other administrative and business-management functions and capacity of ASARCO, develop a plan to improve ASARCO's administrative and business-management functions and capacity; and * Present the results to ASARCO's Board of Directors. B. Phase II * Continue to provide the services described in Phase I and implement the plan approved by ASARCO's Board relative to Phase I; and * Provide other advisory management services as may be requested by ASARCO and agreed by Alvarez & Marsal, pursuant to an amendment to be executed by the parties and approved by the Board.The Debtors will pay Alvarez & Marsal's services on a hybridfixed-fee and hourly-basis compensation structure: (a) $150,000, plus reimbursement for expenses, for services in Phase I; and (b) Customary hourly rates, subject to a 25% discount, for all services it will provide after May 4, 2006: Professionals Hourly Rates ------------- ------------ Managing Directors $475 - $675 Directors $375 - $450 Associates $300 - $350 Analysts $150 - $225Headquartered in Tucson, Arizona, ASARCO LLC -- http://www.asarco.com/-- is an integrated copper mining, smelting and refining company. Grupo Mexico S.A. de C.V. isASARCO's ultimate parent. The Company filed for chapter 11protection on Aug. 9, 2005 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 05-21207).James R. Prince, Esq., Jack L. Kinzie, Esq., and Eric A.Soderlund, Esq., at Baker Botts L.L.P., and Nathaniel PeterHolzer, Esq., Shelby A. Jordan, Esq., and Harlin C. Womble, Esq.,at Jordan, Hyden, Womble & Culbreth, P.C., represent the Debtorin its restructuring efforts. Lehman Brothers Inc. provides theASARCO with financial advisory services and investment bankingservices. Paul M. Singer, Esq., James C. McCarroll, Esq., andDerek J. Baker, Esq., at Reed Smith LLP give legal advice tothe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and David J.Beckman at FTI Consulting, Inc., gives financial advisoryservices to the Committee. When the Debtor filed for protectionfrom its creditors, it listed $600 million in total assets and$1 billion in total debts.The Debtor has five affiliates that filed for chapter 11protection on April 11, 2005 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case Nos. 05-20521through 05-20525). They are Lac d'Amiante Du Quebec Ltee, CAPCOPipe Company, Inc., Cement Asbestos Products Company, LakeAsbestos of Quebec, Ltd., and LAQ Canada, Ltd. Details abouttheir asbestos-driven chapter 11 filings have appeared in theTroubled Company Reporter since Apr. 18, 2005.Encycle/Texas, Inc. (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 05-21304), Encycle,Inc., and ASARCO Consulting, Inc. (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No.05-21346) also filed for chapter 11 protection, and ASARCO hasasked that the three subsidiary cases be jointly administeredwith its chapter 11 case. On Oct. 24, 2005, Encycle/Texas' casewas converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation proceeding. The Courtappointed Michael Boudloche as Encycle/Texas, Inc.'s Chapter 7Trustee. Michael B. Schmidt, Esq., and John Vardeman, Esq., atLaw Offices of Michael B. Schmidt represent the Chapter 7Trustee. (ASARCO Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 22; BankruptcyCreditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000).ASARCO LLC: Encycle Trustee Wants to Hire American Appraisers-------------------------------------------------------------Mike Boudloche, the Chapter 7 trustee of Encycle/Texas, Inc.,seeks authority from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of Texas in Corpus Christi to employ American Appraisers,Inc. American Appraisers will assist the trustee in appraisingand evaluating 61 acres of real property in Corpus Christi, Texas.Mr. Boudloche says AAI employees have extensive knowledge andexperience in rendering real estate appraisals in Nueces County,Texas, and other areas.AAI will be paid $5,000, with a retainer of $2,500.Sidney H. Smith, III, president of American Appraisers, Inc.,assures the Court that his firm does not represent any adverseinterest against Encycle/Texas, and is a \"disinterested person\"as defined in Section 101(14).Headquartered in Tucson, Arizona, ASARCO LLC -- http://www.asarco.com/-- is an integrated copper mining, smelting and refining company. Grupo Mexico S.A. de C.V. isASARCO's ultimate parent. The Company filed for chapter 11protection on Aug. 9, 2005 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 05-21207).James R. Prince, Esq., Jack L. Kinzie, Esq., and Eric A.Soderlund, Esq., at Baker Botts L.L.P., and Nathaniel PeterHolzer, Esq., Shelby A. Jordan, Esq., and Harlin C. Womble, Esq.,at Jordan, Hyden, Womble & Culbreth, P.C., represent the Debtorin its restructuring efforts. Lehman Brothers Inc. provides theASARCO with financial advisory services and investment bankingservices. Paul M. Singer, Esq., James C. McCarroll, Esq., andDerek J. Baker, Esq., at Reed Smith LLP give legal advice tothe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and David J.Beckman at FTI Consulting, Inc., gives financial advisoryservices to the Committee. When the Debtor filed for protectionfrom its creditors, it listed $600 million in total assets and$1 billion in total debts.The Debtor has five affiliates that filed for chapter 11protection on April 11, 2005 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case Nos. 05-20521through 05-20525). They are Lac d'Amiante Du Quebec Ltee, CAPCOPipe Company, Inc., Cement Asbestos Products Company, LakeAsbestos of Quebec, Ltd., and LAQ Canada, Ltd. Details abouttheir asbestos-driven chapter 11 filings have appeared in theTroubled Company Reporter since Apr. 18, 2005.Encycle/Texas, Inc. (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No. 05-21304), Encycle,Inc., and ASARCO Consulting, Inc. (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Case No.05-21346) also filed for chapter 11 protection, and ASARCO hasasked that the three subsidiary cases be jointly administeredwith its chapter 11 case. On Oct. 24, 2005, Encycle/Texas' casewas converted to a Chapter 7 liquidation proceeding. The Courtappointed Michael Boudloche as Encycle/Texas, Inc.'s Chapter 7Trustee. Michael B. Schmidt, Esq., and John Vardeman, Esq., atLaw Offices of Michael B. Schmidt represent the Chapter 7Trustee. (ASARCO Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 22; BankruptcyCreditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000).ATA AIRLINES: Inks Stipulation Allowing GOAA's Claim for $2 Mil.----------------------------------------------------------------The Hon. Basil H. Lorch of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theSouthern District of Indiana approved the stipulation between ATAAirlines, Inc., and the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority in itsentirety. Claim No. 2052 will be allowed as a Class 6 Generalunsecured Claim for $2,000,000, in full and complete satisfactionof the Claim and the Objection. Stipulation Reducing GOAA's Claim to $2,000,000Before their bankruptcy filing, ATA and the Greater OrlandoAviation Authority entered into an Airlines-Airport Lease and UseAgreement dated January 1, 1996.On May 27, 2005, GOAA filed Claim No. 2052 asserting a $5,878,929unsecured non-priority claim.In June 2005, the Reorganizing Debtors sought and obtained theCourt's authority to reject their Agreement with the GOAA. TheReorganizing Debtors also objected to Claim No. 2052.After arm's-length negotiations, the Reorganizing Debtors and theGOAA settled their dispute and agreed that: (a) Claim No. 2052 will be allowed as a Class 6 General unsecured Claim for $2,000,000, in full and complete satisfaction of the Claim and the Objection; and (b) they will exchange mutual releases.Headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana, ATA Airlines, owned by ATAHoldings Corp. -- http://www.ata.com/-- is the nation's 10th largest passenger carrier (based on revenue passenger miles) andone of the nation's largest low-fare carriers. ATA has one of theyoungest, most fuel-efficient fleets among the major carriers,featuring the new Boeing 737-800 and 757-300 aircraft. Theairline operates significant scheduled service from Chicago-Midway, Hawaii, Indianapolis, New York and San Francisco to over40 business and vacation destinations. Stock of parent company,ATA Holdings Corp., is traded on the Nasdaq Stock Exchange. TheCompany and its debtor-affiliates filed for chapter 11 protectionon Oct. 26, 2004 (Bankr. S.D. Ind. Case Nos. 04-19866, 04-19868through 04-19874). Terry E. Hall, Esq., at Baker & Daniels,represents the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Daniel H.Golden, Esq., Lisa G. Beckerman, Esq., and John S. Strickland,Esq., at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP, represents theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they listed $745,159,000 intotal assets and $940,521,000 in total debts. (ATA AirlinesBankruptcy News, Issue No. 54; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service,Inc., 215/945-7000)BAYOU GROUP: Files for Chapter 11 Protection in New York--------------------------------------------------------The Bayou (Domestic) Hedge Funds filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcyrelief on May 30, 2006 in New York. Under the direction of JeffMarwil, the domestic Bayou entities' independent fiduciary andpartner at Jenner & Block, with the outside counsel of H. JeffreySchwartz, partner in the bankruptcy and corporate reorganizationand insolvency practice at Dechert LLP, the failed hedge fund willpursue recoveries for the benefit of defrauded investors under theprotection of Chapter 11.In connection with filing Chapter 11, Bayou filed lawsuits againstformer investors who allegedly received fictitious profits and aninequitably large return of their principal investments. Mr.Marwil said that he expects that \"Bayou will file additional suitsagainst the remaining former investors to recover proceeds offraudulent conveyances for the benefit of innocent investors whohave received little, if anything, from Bayou.\" He further statedthat \"the pendency of the Chapter 11 cases will provide aconvenient venue to efficiently investigate and pursue formerinvestors and other non-investor, third-parties allegedlycomplicit in the fraud, with the goal of assuring an equality ofdistribution among all of Bayou's investors. It is patentlyunfair that certain former investors received all of their moneyback, plus profit, while other investors received nothing. Thesecases will be about equality of distribution, fairness andequity,\" he said.Jeff J. Marwil, a partner at Jenner & Block, was appointed onApril 28, 2006 as the federal equity receiver charged with theduty to, among other things, seek recoveries for defraudedinvestors who invested approximately $450 million, and otherwiseadminister the liquidation of the domestic Bayou hedge funds. Heis a member of Jenner & Block's Bankruptcy, Workout and CorporateReorganization Practice and serves on the Firm's ManagementCommittee. Mr. Marwil is AV Peer Review Rated, Martindale-Hubbell's highest peer recognition for ethical standards and legalability. He has a diverse practice with extensive experience inboth the boardroom and the courtroom, and regularly advisesfiduciaries in distressed situations.The Bayou on-shore entities are being advised by H. JeffreySchwartz, partner at the law firm of Dechert LLP, with assistanceof partners Edward A. McDonald and Gary J. Mennitt and associateElise Scherr Frejka. Mr. Schwartz has more than 25 years of majorreorganization and restructuring experience and was recognized inChambers USA, Ohio -- Bankruptcy/Restructuring 2004, 2005 and BestLawyers in America, 2004, 2005. He has extensive experience inthe reorganization practice under the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, Bayou Hedge Funds operates andmanages hedge funds. The Company's founder, Samuel Israel III,and chief financial officer Daniel Marino, have been charged withfraud and conspiracy for defrauding investors of more than $450million in hedge funds and using the funds for personal use.BAYOU GROUP: Voluntary Chapter 11 Case Summary----------------------------------------------Debtor: Bayou Group, LLC Jeff J. Marwil, Esq. c/o Jenner & Block LLP One IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 Tel: (312) 923-2619 Fax: (312) 923-2719Bankruptcy Case No.: 06-22306Debtor affiliates filing separate chapter 11 petitions: Entity Case No. ------ -------- Bayou Management, LLC 06-22305 Bayou Superfund, LLC 06-22307 Bayou No Leverage Fund, LLC 06-22308 Bayou Affiliates Fund, LLC 06-22309 Bayou Accredited Fund, LLC 06-22310 Bayou Fund, LLC 06-22311 Bayou Advisors, LLC 06-22312 Bayou Equities, LLC 06-22313Type of Business: The Debtors operate and manage hedge funds. The Debtors' founder, Samuel Israel III, and chief financial officer Daniel Marino, have been charged with fraud and conspiracy for defrauding investors of more than $450 million in hedge funds and using the funds for personal use. Jeff J. Marwil, Esq., a partner at Jenner & Block LLP, has been appointed receiver and sole managing member of the Debtor and its affiliates.Chapter 11 Petition Date: May 30, 2006Court: Southern District of New York (White Plains)Judge: Adlai S. Hardin Jr.Debtors' Counsel: Elise Scherr Frejka, Esq. Dechert LLP 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10112 Tel: (212) 649-8734 Fax: (212) 698-3599Estimated Assets: More than $100 MillionEstimated Debts: More than $100 MillionThe Debtors did not file a list of their 20 largest unsecuredcreditors.BERRY-HILL GALLERIES: Court Sets June 15 as Governmental Bar Date-----------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New Yorkset June 15, 2006, as the deadline for all government entitiesowed money by Berry-Hill Galleries, Inc., and its debtor-affiliate, Coram Capital LLC, on account of claims arising priorto Dec. 8, 2005, to file their proofs of claim.Government units must file written proofs of claim on or beforethe June 15 Claims Bar Date either by mail to: U.S. Bankruptcy Court Southern District of New York Attn: Berry-Hill/Coram Claims Processing Bowling Green Station, P.O. Box 5187 New York, New York 10274-5187 or courier: U.S. Bankruptcy Court Southern District of New York Attn: Berry-Hill/Coram Claims Processing One Bowling Green, Room 534 New York, New York 10004-1408Headquartered in New York, New York, Berry-Hill Galleries, Inc.-- http://www.berry-hill.com/-- buys paintings and sculpture through outright purchase or on a commission basis and alsoexhibits artworks. The Debtor and its affiliate, Coram CapitalLLC, filed for chapter 11 protection on Dec. 8, 2005 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y. Case Nos. 05-60169 & 05-60170). Robert T. Schmidt, Esq.,at Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel, LLP, represents the Debtorsin their restructuring efforts. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they estimated assets between$10 million and $100 million and debts between $1 million and$50 million.BIJOU-MARKET: Court Sets July 3 as Deadline for Filing of Claims----------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Californiaestablished July 3, 2006 as the deadline for filing proofs ofclaims in Bijou-Market, LLC's chapter 11 cases.All proofs of claim must be filed with the Clerk of the BankruptcyCourt, and sent either by mail or courier to this address: Office of the Clerk U.S. Bankruptcy Court Northern District of California 19th Floor, 235 Pine Street, San Francisco, CA 94104Bijou-Market, LLC -- http://www.msclive.com/-- operates an adult entertainment facility on Market Street in San Francisco. Thecompany filed for chapter 11 protection on Feb. 28, 2006 (Bankr.N.D. Calif. Case No. 06-30118). Michael St. James, Esq., at St.James Law, P.C., represents the Debtor in its restructuringefforts. No Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has beenappointed in this case to date. When the Debtor filed forprotection from its creditors, it listed assets totaling $620,458and debts totaling $66,308,352.BUCKEYE TECHNOLOGIES: Posts $795,000 Net Loss in 2006 1st Quarter-----------------------------------------------------------------Buckeye Technologies, Inc., reported a $795,000 net loss on $181.4million of net revenues for the first quarter ended March 31,2006, compared to $4 million of net income on $180.9 million ofnet revenues for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005.As of March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed totalassets of $969.7 million and total debts of $688.3 million.A full-text copy of Buckeye Technologies' Quarterly Report isavailable for free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a22Headquartered in Memphis, Tennessee, Buckeye Technologies, Inc. --http://www.bkitech.com/-- is a leading manufacturer and marketer of specialty fibers and nonwoven materials. The Company currentlyoperates facilities in the United States, Germany, Canada, andBrazil. Its products are sold worldwide to makers of consumer andindustrial goods. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on March 9, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services revised its outlook on BuckeyeTechnologies Inc. to negative from stable. At the same time,Standard & Poor's affirmed its ratings, including the 'BB-'corporate credit rating, on the Memphis, Tennessee-based specialtypulp producer.CATHOLIC CHURCH: Dufresne Wants Portland's Claim Estimation Denied------------------------------------------------------------------Nathan DuFresne asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District ofOregon to deny the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon's request toestimate his claim.Karl I. Mullen, Esq., in Portland, Oregon, argues that due to theArchdiocese's motions and actions, Mr. DuFresne was not able toobtain the discovery needed to establish the value of his claim.Disclosing much of Mr. DuFresne's evidence at this point wouldgreatly harm his ability to prove his case at trial.Mr. Mullen asserts that Mr. DuFresne's claims should be estimatedat $2,250,000 as average value.There is no need to estimate, Mr. Mullen contends. The face valueof all of the claims is substantially less than the value of theArchdiocese's assets.Moreover, the evidence that Mr. DuFresne submitted is sufficientto establish the face value of his claim, Mr. Mullen says. Inaddition, estimation is not a proper procedure in thecircumstances of Mr. DuFresne's case and the bankruptcy case.Mr. DuFresne, therefore, asks the Court to estimate his claims at$2,250,000 average value, or at its face value -- $919,700 ascompensatory damages and $9,000,000 as punitive damages.The Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon filed for chapter 11protection (Bankr. Ore. Case No. 04-37154) on July 6, 2004.Thomas W. Stilley, Esq., and William N. Stiles, Esq., at SussmanShank LLP, represent the Portland Archdiocese in its restructuringefforts. Albert N. Kennedy, Esq., at Tonkon Torp, LLP, representsthe Official Tort Claimants Committee in Portland, and scores ofabuse victims are represented by other lawyers. David A. Forakerserves as the Future Claimants Representative appointed in theArchdiocese of Portland's Chapter 11 case. In its Schedules ofAssets and Liabilities filed with the Court on July 30, 2004, thePortland Archdiocese reports $19,251,558 in assets and$373,015,566 in liabilities. (Catholic Church Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 59; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)CATHOLIC CHURCH: Tucson Panel Wants to Settle Claim for $367,500----------------------------------------------------------------To avoid the risks of litigation, the Official Committee of TortClaimants and the holder of Claim No. 79 entered into astipulation with the Diocese of Tucson resolving the dispute overthe Claim.The Tort Claimants Committee asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe District of Arizona to approve the Stipulation.The terms of the Stipulation are: (a) Claimant No. 79 will have an Allowed Tort Claim for $367,500. Claimant No. 79 waives any claims for further distributions afforded to Settling Tort Claimants pursuant to the Diocese's Plan of Reorganization; (b) Claimant No. 79 will immediately receive an initial distribution amount. The Initial Distribution Amounts for each Tier are: (i) Tier 1: $100,000; (ii) Tier 2: $200,000; (iii) Tier 3: $425,000; (iv) Tier 4: $600,000; and (v) California Tier: $300,000. The claims of parents or spouses of Claimant No. 79, who have Tort Claims, will receive 5% of the highest amount recovered by Claimant No. 79 as provided in the Plan. The Stipulation with each Relationship Tort Claimant is consistent with the terms of the Plan; (c) The Committee agree that the distributions and any other compensation being made to Claimant No. 79 pursuant to the Stipulation and the Plan are for compensation of his or her claims for physical injury. The Committee further agree that it would cooperate with Claimant No. 79 and the Claimant's attorneys to draft and execute the appropriate documents to allow the Claimant to place all or any portion of the distributions in an annuity or structured settlement, if the Claimant elects; (d) To the extent it is necessary to determine the full extent of the Diocese's liability to Claimant No. 79 on account of Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, Tier 4, California Tier Claims or Relationship Tort Claims, the parties agree that the determinations will be made in a proceeding which may be before the Bankruptcy Court; provided, however, that notwithstanding the amount of the liability, Claimant No. 79 agree: -- to be bound by the terms of the Plan in accordance with the Stipulation; and -- not to seek further or additional recovery from the Diocese so long as the Plan provides for treatment of the Claimant's tort claims in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation. O'Connor ObjectsOn behalf of claimant Brian O'Connor, Walter F. Wood, Esq., inTucson, Arizona, asserts that the proposed settlement of ClaimNo. 79 does not comport with the provisions of the Plan.Mr. Wood notes that the Tucson Diocese's Plan provides a tieredstructure for all of the claims of purported victims. Each tiercontained a specific set of facts that denominated andcharacterized that tier. Each tier was assigned a compensatorydollar amount that would be paid to a claim holder upon approvaland \"tiering\" of the claim.Each tier also has the capability of receiving additional paymentsfrom the funding pool if certain factors occurred, or did notoccur, Mr. Wood notes. Part of the funding pool was money setaside for future claimants, which will be distributed among thetiers when and if no future claimants timely file claims.The risk of receiving more than the initial distribution falls tothose who have previously negotiated their specific tier placementbased upon the treatment of tiers set out in the Plan, Mr. Woodpoints out.Mr. Wood argues that the proposed settlement gives no authorityfor creating a special \"tier\" or class for Claim No. 79 and offersno \"consideration\" for the treatment.According to Mr. Wood, his client, Mr. O'Connor, settled andagreed to a Tier 2 claim based on the provisions of the Plan thatcalled for the risk of future recovery to be born equally by allvictims within a tier.Thus, Mr. O'Connor, in his personal capacity, asks the Court todeny the settlement agreement entered into by the Tort Committeeand the Diocese with Claimant No. 79. Tort Committee RepliesMr. O'Connor misapprehends both the operation of the Plan and thenature of the settlement, Warren J. Stapleton, Esq., at StinsonMorrison Hecker LLP, in Phoenix, Arizona, asserts.Although the Plan sets out a tiered structure for resolution oftort claims, that does not prohibit a tort claimant from reachinga settlement outside of the tier structure, Mr. Stapletoncontends.\"[N]owhere in his objection does Objector identify language in thePlan which would prevent the parties from reaching a negotiatedsettlement,\" Mr. Stapleton says.Mr. Stapleton tells the Court that the Committee disputedClaimant No. 79's claim to a Tier 3 placement, although it did notdispute placement in Tier 2. The Committee acknowledged thatthere was nevertheless some risk that Claimant No. 79 would begiven a Tier 3 placement after discovery and litigation before aspecial arbitrator.To avoid the litigation and the risk that the Special Arbitratorwould award Claimant No. 79 placement in Tier 3, a one-time cashsettlement was reached for the projected amount that a Tier 2claimant is likely to ultimately receive.The circumstances of individual tort claims are unique, Mr.Stapleton points out. \"[Mr. O'Connor], himself chose settlementon the terms offered him rather than litigation.\"Hence, the Tort Committee asks the Court to approve the settlementwith Claimant No. 79.Tort claimant John Doe XXIII supports the Tort Committee'sarguments. Diocese of TucsonThe Roman Catholic Church of the Diocese of Tucson filed forchapter 11 protection (Bankr. D. Ariz. Case No. 04-04721) onSeptember 20, 2004, and delivered a plan of reorganization to theCourt on the same day. Susan G. Boswell, Esq., Kasey C. Nye,Esq., at Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP, represent the TucsonDiocese. (Catholic Church Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 58Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)CATHOLIC CHURCH: Portland Asks Court to Disallow Claim No. 437--------------------------------------------------------------The holder of Claim No. 437 filed his proof of claim against theArchdiocese of Portland in Oregon on April 28, 2005.The Archdiocese scheduled the deposition on April 18, 2006. Butneither Claimant No. 437, nor his lawyer, appeared for thedeposition.For this reason, the Archdiocese asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtfor the District of Oregon to: (a) disallow Claim No. 437 in its entirety; and (b) compel Claimant No. 437 to pay the appearance fee for the court reporter and the videographer, incurred as a result of his non-compliance.Margaret Hoffmann, Esq., at Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, PC, inPortland, Oregon, relates that at the initial phase of discovery,all of Claimant No. 437's allegations were \"recent enough\" to fallwithin the criminal statute of limitations for child sex abuse.The Archdiocese subsequently asked Judge Perris to compel ClaimantNo. 437 to submit to a deposition. The Archdiocese asserted thatClaimant No. 437's testimony was integral to the: -- resolution of Fifth Amendment issues; and -- the Archdiocese's ability to resolve claims of other claimants involving the same accused priest.Since that time, Ms. Hoffmann further relates that she madeseveral attempts to schedule Claimant No. 437's deposition. InNovember 2005, Claimant No. 437's attorney wrote the Archdiocese,explaining that the deposition cannot be conducted because hecannot locate his client. Claimant No. 437's Counsel RespondsOn behalf of Claimant No. 437, Gary Bisaccio, Esq., in Portland,Oregon, tells Judge Perris that Ms. Hoffman arranged for a courtreporter and videographer to appear for a deposition she knewwould not take place.Mr. Bisaccio also tells the Court that, on several occasions, hetold Ms. Hoffman that his client did not wish to submit to adeposition. He also told Ms. Hoffman not to incur costs relatedto the proceeding. But Ms. Hoffman went on to arrange for thedeposition.Hence, Mr. Bisaccio asks the Court to charge the depositionexpenses against the Archdiocese.Mr. Bisaccio, in a separate pleading, asks the Court to berelieved as counsel for Claimant No. 437.Mr. Bisaccio says Claimant No. 437 has refused to communicate andcooperate with him, a conduct, which has, in effect,constructively relieved him of his ability and obligation toproceed on the Claimant's behalf. The Archdiocese of PortlandThe Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon filed for chapter 11protection (Bankr. Ore. Case No. 04-37154) on July 6, 2004.Thomas W. Stilley, Esq., and William N. Stiles, Esq., at SussmanShank LLP, represent the Portland Archdiocese in its restructuringefforts. Albert N. Kennedy, Esq., at Tonkon Torp, LLP, representsthe Official Tort Claimants Committee in Portland, and scores ofabuse victims are represented by other lawyers. David A. Forakerserves as the Future Claimants Representative appointed in theArchdiocese of Portland's Chapter 11 case. In its Schedules ofAssets and Liabilities filed with the Court on July 30, 2004, thePortland Archdiocese reports $19,251,558 in assets and$373,015,566 in liabilities. (Catholic Church Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 59; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)CERVANTES ORCHARDS: Deere Says Disclosure Statement is Incomplete----------------------------------------------------------------- Deere Credit, Inc. objects to the disclosure statement filed byCervantes Orchards & Vineyards, LLC for lack of adequateinformation.Deere Credit questions, among others, the Debtor's revenue andexpense projections for 2006 through 2009.Deere Credit asserts that the projections should include: a) information allowing creditors to understand the revenue assumptions by the Debtor; b) information showing how the payments proposed in the Plan will work into the Debtor's cash flow; and c) detailing any contributions to be made by the Debtor's related entities to support the Plan.Additionally, Deere Credit wants the Disclosure Statement amended.According to the Debtor's valuation, Deere Credit is anoversecured creditor and is entitled to full value of its claimunder the Plan. However, Deere Credit argues that the DisclosureStatement did not accurately reflect the amount of its claim.Headquartered in Sunnyside, Washington, Cervantes Orchards andVineyards LLC filed for chapter 11 protection on Aug. 19, 2005(Bankr. E.D. Wash. Case No. 05-06600). R. Bruce Johnston, Esq.,at Law Offices of R. Bruce Johnston represents the Debtor in itsrestructuring efforts. No Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors has been appointed in this case. When the Debtor filedfor protection from its creditors, it listed estimated assets of$10 million to $50 million and estimated debts of $1 million to$10 million.CHEMTURA CORP: Gets $85 Million from Water Additives Unit Sale--------------------------------------------------------------Chemtura Corporation completed the sale of its Industrial WaterAdditives business to an affiliate of Close Brothers PrivateEquity LLP, a U.K. firm, on May 15, 2006. In connection with thistransaction the company received $85 million in cash. Excludedfrom the sale is the LiquiBrom(R) product line. Proceeds from thesale will be used primarily for debt reduction.\"We are very happy to announce the completion of this transaction,which we believe will benefit all parties. Industrial WaterAdditives is a strong enterprise, which we expect will do wellwith Close Brothers, but it doesn't fit our strategy ofconcentrating on core businesses that will produce the greatestresults for us,\" said Chemtura Chairman and CEO Robert L. Wood.No facilities were included in the transaction. Chemtura willcontinue to manufacture products in its Adrian, Mich., andTrafford Park, U.K. facilities and sell to the purchaser viasupply agreements. Industrial Water Additives' approximately 40non-manufacturing employees will become employees of BWA WaterAdditives, a CBPE affiliate. BWA will act as distributor for theLiquiBrom product line. There will be no gain or loss booked onthe transaction, which is expected to be dilutive to earnings by$0.01 in 2006 and $0.02 in 2007.Industrial Water Additives had pro forma 2005 revenues ofapproximately $80 million, excluding the LiquiBrom product line.Industrial Water Additives is a major producer of organic,polymer-based antiscalants and corrosion inhibitors and bromine-based biocides. Its Belclene(R), Belcor(R), Belgard(R),Belite(R), Bellacide(R), Bellasol(R), Belsperse(R), BromiCide(R),Flocon(R) and LiquiBrom products help to control scale, corrosion,foam and problem organisms in industrial cooling, industrial andmunicipal wastewater treatment, pulp and paper processing, foodprocessing, and desalination processes. About Chemtura CorporationHeadquartered in Middlebury, Connecticut, Chemtura Corporation(NYSE: CEM) -- http://www.chemtura.com/-- is a global manufacturer and marketer of specialty chemicals, crop protectionand pool, spa and home care products. With pro forma 2005 salesof $3.9 billion, the company has approximately 7,300 employeesaround the world. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Mar 17, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services revised its outlook onMiddlebury, Connecticut-based Chemtura Corp. to positive fromstable and affirmed the existing 'BB+' ratings.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Sept. 26, 2005,Moody's Investors Service affirmed Ba1 ratings on all of ChemturaCorporation's outstanding $1.27 billion of senior unsecured debtobligations, and changed the outlook on the company's ratings tonegative from stable.CLARION TECHNOLOGIES: Posts $2.4 Mil. Net Loss in First Quarter---------------------------------------------------------------Clarion Technologies, Inc., filed its financial results for thefirst quarter ended April 1, 2006, with the Securities andExchange Commission on May 16, 2006.For the three months ended April 1, 2006, the company reported a$2.4 million net loss on $35.8 million of net revenues compared toa $2.8 million net loss on $32.3 million of net revenues for thequarter ended April 2, 2005.At April 1, 2006, the company's balance sheet showed total assetsof $73.6 million and total debts of $108.7 million, resulting in a$91.7 million stockholders' deficit. As of April 1, 2006, theCompany's accumulated deficit widened to $123.9 million from a$118.3 million accumulated deficit at Dec. 31, 2005.A full-text copy of Clarion Technologies' Quarterly Report isavailable for free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?9ee Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 27, 2006,BDO Seidman, LLP, raised substantial doubt about ClarionTechnologies, Inc.'s ability to continue as a going concern afterit audited the company's financial statements for the year endedDec. 31, 2005. The auditing firm points to the company'srecurring losses from operations, working capital deficit,accumulated deficit and violation of certain covenants in its loanagreements.Headquartered in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Clarion Technologies,Inc. -- http://www.clariontechnologies.com/-- creates products and parts for the automotive, furniture and consumer goodsindustry.CLEAN EARTH: Gets Interim Access to $750,000 DIP Financing----------------------------------------------------------The Hon. Joseph M. Scott of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theEastern District of Kentucky in Lexington allowed Clean EarthKentucky, LLC, and its debtor-affiliate, Clean Earth EnvironmentalGroup, LLC, on an interim basis, to obtain postpetition securedloans of up to $750,000 from US Acquisition, LLC.US Acquisition is successor-in-interest to National City Bank ofKentucky. When they filed for bankruptcy, the Debtors hadapproximately $14 million in disputed secured and unsecured debtsowed to the bank.The Debtors tell the Court that the DIP loan proceeds will be usedto pay their employees and finance their operations pursuant tothe New Loan Agreement.As security for the New Obligations, the Debtors grant the lendersvalid, perfected, and enforceable security interests and liens.US Acquisition's lien in the collateral will be a first priority,senior, perfected lien securing the full amount of the NewObligations.Headquartered in Cynthiana, Kentucky, Clean Earth Kentucky, LLC --http://www.cleanearthllc.com/-- manufactures specialized sewer machines, street sweepers, and refuse trucks. The Company and itsaffiliate, Clean Earth Environmental Group, LLC, filed for chapter11 protection on Jan. 24, 2006. (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Case No.06-50052). Laura Day DelCotto, Esq., at Wise DelCotto PLLC,represents the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. R. ScottWilliams, Esq., at Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC,represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. Whenthe Debtors filed for protection from its creditors, theyestimated individual assets and debts between $10 million to$50 million.CLEAN EARTH: Has Until June 30 to File Chapter 11 Plan------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Kentuckyextended until June 30, 2006, the period within which Clean EarthKentucky, LLC, and Clean Earth Environmental Group, LLC, have theexclusive right to file their chapter 11 Plan. The Debtors alsohave until Aug. 30, 2006, to solicit acceptances of that Plan.The Debtors tell the Court that the extension will give them moretime to formulate their disclosure statements and plans. They addthat it will allow them to focus on the operations left afterselling part of their assets and to determine how best to usethese operations in their restructuring efforts.Headquartered in Cynthiana, Kentucky, Clean Earth Kentucky, LLC --http://www.cleanearthllc.com/-- manufactures specialized sewer machines, street sweepers, and refuse trucks. The Company and itsaffiliate, Clean Earth Environmental Group, LLC, filed for chapter11 protection on Jan. 24, 2006. (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Case No.06-50052). Laura Day DelCotto, Esq., at Wise DelCotto PLLC,represents the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. R. ScottWilliams, Esq., at Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC,represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. Whenthe Debtors filed for protection from its creditors, theyestimated individual assets and debts between $10 million to $50million.CLEAN EARTH: Court Approves Phil Daetwyler's Retention as COO-------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Kentuckyapproved the request of Clean Earth Kentucky, LLC, and Clean EarthEnvironmental Group, LLC, to retain Phil Daetwyler as their ChiefOperating Officer, nunc pro tunc to May 2, 2006.The Debtors believe that Mr. Daetwyler is well qualified and ableto oversee the Debtors' operations in a cost-effective, efficientand timely manner. Mr. Daetwyler will be paid $150,000 per annumplus benefits, and other bonuses.To the best of the Debtors' knowledge, Mr. Daetwyler is a\"disinterested person\" as that term is defined in Section 101(14)of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Cynthiana, Kentucky, Clean Earth Kentucky, LLC --http://www.cleanearthllc.com/-- manufactures specialized sewer machines, street sweepers, and refuse trucks. The Company and itsaffiliate, Clean Earth Environmental Group, LLC, filed for chapter11 protection on Jan. 24, 2006. (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Case No.06-50052). Laura Day DelCotto, Esq., at Wise DelCotto PLLC,represents the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. R. ScottWilliams, Esq., at Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC,represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. Whenthe Debtors filed for protection from its creditors, theyestimated individual assets and debts between $10 million to $50million.CMS ENERGY: Posts $27 Million Net Loss in 2006 First Quarter------------------------------------------------------------CMS Energy incurred a net loss of $27 million for the firstquarter of 2006 compared to a net income of $150 million in thesame quarter of 2005.The expected reversal of $74 million of mark-to-market gainsrecorded in 2005 was the primary factor in the loss. Mark-to-market is a non-cash accounting adjustment that primarily reflectschanges in the value of certain natural gas contracts.The Company's adjusted results for the first quarter of 2006,excluding mark-to-market effects, were net income of $48 millioncompared to $73 million in the same period for 2005. The year-over-year drop in the adjusted results, excluding mark-to-market,was caused primarily by lower gas and electric sales due to muchwarmer weather during the quarter compared to the first quarter of2005, including the warmest January on record.CMS Energy maintained its guidance for 2006 adjusted earnings,excluding mark-to-market impacts, of about $1 per share. TheCompany reiterated that its 2006 reported earnings are likely tobe substantially lower than its adjusted earnings because of theexpected reversal of mark-to-market gains and losses frompotential asset sales. CMS Energy isn't providing specificreported earnings guidance because of the uncertainties associatedwith those factors.\"The weather and high natural gas prices have been challenging.However, operating performance continues to be strong, and wecontinue to make progress on our plan\" said David Joos, presidentand chief executive officer of CMS Energy.CMCMS Energy is an integrated energy company, which has as itsprimary business operations an electric and natural gas utility,natural gas pipeline systems, and independent power generation. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Feb. 2, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its 'BB' long-termcorporate credit ratings on public utility holding company, CMSEnergy Corp., and its regulated utility subsidiary, ConsumersEnergy Co., and removed the ratings from CreditWatch with negativeimplications.Standard & Poor's also affirmed its 'B-1' short-term corporatecredit rating on CMS and removed the rating from CreditWatch withnegative implications. S&P said the outlook is stable.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Dec. 12, 2005,Fitch Ratings has assigned a rating of 'BB-' to CMS Energy Corp.'s$125 million issuance of 6.875% senior unsecured notes, dueDec. 15, 2015. Fitch said the Rating Outlook for CMS isStable.COMCAST CORP: Earns $466 Million in First Quarter Ended March 31----------------------------------------------------------------Comcast Corporation disclosed its financial results for the firstquarter ended March 31, 2006, to the Securities and ExchangeCommission on April 28, 2006.For the year ended March 31, 2006, the Company reported $466million of net income on $5.9 billion of net revenues, compared to$143 million of net income on $5.4 million of net revenues for theyear ended Dec. 31, 2005.As of March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed totalassets of $103 billion and total debts of $62.9 billion.A full-text copy of Comcast Corp.'s Quarterly Report is availablefor free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a25Headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Comcast Corp. --http://www.comcast.com/-- provides cable, and other consumer entertainment and communication products and services in theUnited States.Comcast Corp.'s preferred stock carries Moody's InvestorsService's Ba1 Rating.DEATH ROW: U.S. Trustee Appoints Five-Member Creditors Committee----------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Trustee for Region 16 appointed five creditors to serveon an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in Death RowRecords Inc. and its debtor-affiliates' chapter 11 cases: 1. Afeni Shakur c/o Brian Bloom, Esq., Cozen O'Connor 777 S. Figueroa Street, Ste 2850 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Tel: 213-892-7900 212-453-3750 2. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro LLP c/o Mark L. Block, Esq. 10250 Constellation Blvd., 19th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Tel: 340-282-6240 Fax: 310-550-2920 3. Amanda Metcalf, Esq., 29 Marin Bay Park Court San Rafael, CS 94901 415-454-0945 4. Lydia Harris c/o David Lally, Esq. 26895 Aliso Creek Road Suite B663 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Tel: 949-349-0022 Fax: 949-349-0019 5. Dwayne Baudy c/o Joseph E. Porter, III, Esq. 206 3rd Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 Tel: 562-493-3940 Fax: 562-493-3670Official creditors' committees have the right to employ legal andaccounting professionals and financial advisors, at the Debtors'expense. They may investigate the Debtors' business and financialaffairs. Importantly, official committees serve as fiduciaries tothe general population of creditors they represent. Thosecommittees will also attempt to negotiate the terms of aconsensual chapter 11 plan -- almost always subject to the termsof strict confidentiality agreements with the Debtors and othercore parties-in-interest. If negotiations break down, theCommittee may ask the Bankruptcy Court to replace management withan independent trustee. If the Committee concludes reorganizationof the Debtors is impossible, the Committee will urge theBankruptcy Court to convert the chapter 11 cases to a liquidationproceeding.Headquartered in Compton, California, Death Row Records Inc. --http://www.deathrowrecords.net/-- is an independent record producer. The company and its owner, Marion Knight, Jr., filedfor chapter 11 protection on April 4, 2006 (Bankr. C.D. Calif.Case No. 06-11205 and 06-11187). Daniel J. McCarthy, Esq., atHill, Farrer & Burrill, LLP, and Robert S. Altagen, Esq.,represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. When theDebtors filed for protection from their creditors, they listedtotal assets of $1,500,000 and total debts of $119,794,000.DND TECHNOLOGIES: March 31 Balance Sheet Upside Down by $6.9 Mil.-----------------------------------------------------------------DND Technologies, Inc., filed its first quarter financialstatements for the three months ended March 31, 2006, with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on May 19, 2006.The Company reported a $417,823 net loss on $1,988,370 of totalrevenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $3,243,398in total assets and $10,199,072 in total liabilities, resulting ina $6,955,674 stockholders' deficit.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $2,979,915 in total current assets available to pay$10,175,792 in total current liabilities coming due within thenext 12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a1a Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 22, 2006,Farber Hass Hurley & McEwen LLP raised substantial doubt about DNDTechnologies, Inc.'s ability to continue as a going concern afterauditing the Company's consolidated financial statements for theyear ended Dec. 31, 2005. The auditor pointed to the Company'slosses, negative working capital, receipt of a license agreementtermination notice for its agreement with a major supplier, anddefault on the majority of its term debt.Headquartered in Chandler, Arizona, DND Technologies, Inc.'s(OTCBB: DNDT) operating subsidiary, Aspect Systems, Inc. --http://www.aspectsys.com/-- supplies semiconductor manufacturing equipment and complete after-market support, which includes spareparts and assemblies, and various engineering services. Throughlicensing agreements negotiated with Lam Research Corporation andAxcelis Technologies, Inc., ASI has become the original equipmentmanufacturer of AutoEtch plasma etch systems originally designedby Lam, and plasma etch and strip products manufactured on the ASIMX-1 and ASI MX-10, and the Arista and Arista Dual platforms. ASIalso offers new and refurbished support products including a widearray of sub-assemblies, both consumable and non-consumable repairand process related parts, and remanufactured temperature controlunits that are designed to maintain critical operatingtemperatures for the plasma systems.EASYLINK SERVICES: Posts $376,000 Net Loss in 2006 First Quarter----------------------------------------------------------------EasyLink Services Corporation generated $18.5 million of revenuesfor the first quarter of 2006 ended March 31, 2006, as compared to$18.5 million during the fourth quarter of 2005 and $20.4 millionin the first quarter of 2005.The Company reported a $376,000 net loss during the first quarter,in contrast to a $2,741,000 net loss for the same period in 2005.The Company's cash and cash equivalents balance at the end of thefirst quarter 2006 was $4.1 million as compared to $6.3 million asof Dec. 31, 2005. The decline in cash includes principal paymentson existing debt of $1.6 million as required by the Company'samended Credit agreement with Wells Fargo Foothill.Subsequent to March 31, 2006, EasyLink raised $5.4 million in newequity financing. Approximately $3 million of the proceeds wereused to prepay a portion of the Company's debt with Wells Fargo asrequired by the Credit Agreement that reduced its debt remainingwith Wells Fargo to $5.8 million as of April 30, 2006. Thebalance of the proceeds totaling $2.4 million will be used forworking capital purposes. For the quarter ended March 31, 2006,net cash from operating activities was approximately breakeven.Thomas Murawski, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officerof EasyLink, said, \"The first quarter of 2006 was a strong quarterfor us in several key areas including a 10.6% quarterly revenueincrease in our Transaction Management Services.\"Total revenue was about even with last quarter; however, based onimproved sales productivity we have sufficient momentum to enableus to forecast the second quarter of 2006 to be the first quarterwith total revenue growth since we became EasyLink Services.\"This positive outcome is the result of the diligent execution ofour strategy to re-architect our company around TransactionManagement Services to put the company on a sustainable growthfooting. Transaction Management Services represented 25% of totalcompany revenue in the first quarter, up from 18% a year ago.\"We expect this percentage to increase to between 27% to 30%during the second quarter of 2006 driven by the growth in ourTransaction Management Services which includes the anticipatedclosure of a software sale that would generate a one time feerather than recurring revenue.\"In summary, EasyLink has made a good start to 2006, and ourrevenue, implementation, retention and pipeline indicators arefavorable for the second quarter as well, which should driveforecasted revenue growth.\"Looking beyond just the numbers, our team sees continualreaffirmation of our strategy on a daily basis with our existingcustomers and new prospects. While it's clear that EasyLink'scorporate execution is improving, most recently through salesproductivity gains and on a continuous basis through Six Sigma, itis also becoming increasingly apparent that the demand for ourunique mix of outsourced business process automation services ison the increase.\"We see this through increased requests for proposal from Fortune500 companies, activity and interest at trade events, inboundinquiries through our websites and telesales group, projectopportunities arising from our existing customer base, and thenumber and quality of customer appointments our sales team hasevery week. It's an exciting time for all of us at EasyLink.\" Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 16, 2006,Grant Thornton LLP expressed substantial doubt about EasylinkServices Corporation's ability to continue as a going concernafter it audited the Company's financial statement for the yearended Dec. 31, 2005. The accounting firm pointed to the Company'shistory of operating losses as well as its $542.0 millionaccumulated deficit and $9.5 million working capital deficit atDec. 31, 2005.Headquartered in Piscataway, New Jersey, Easylink ServicesCorporation (NASDAQ: EASY) -- http://www.EasyLink.com/-- provides outsourced business process automation services to medium andlarge enterprises, including 60 of the Fortune 100, to improveproductivity and competitiveness by transforming manual and paper-based business processes into efficient electronic businessprocesses.ELECTRIC CITY: Post $1.9 Million Net Loss in 2006 1st Fiscal Qtr.-----------------------------------------------------------------Electric City Corp. filed its first quarter financial statementsfor the three months ended March 31, 2006, with the Securities andExchange Commission on May 15, 2006.The Company reported a $1,956,605 net loss on $1,146,345 ofrevenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $7,151,691in total assets, $5,637,860 in total liabilities, and $2,371,899in stockholders' equity.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a14 Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on March 30, 2006,BDO Seidman, LLP, expressed substantial doubt about Electric CityCorp.'s ability to continue as a going concern after auditing theCompany's financial statements for the years ended Dec. 31, 2005and 2004. The auditing firm pointed to the Company's recurringlosses from operations. About Electric CityHeadquartered in Elk Grove Village, Illinois, Electric City Corp.-- http://www.elccorp.com/-- is a leading developer, manufacturer and integrator of energy savings technologies and performancemonitoring systems. Electric City is comprised of threeintegrated operating companies that provide customers with totalenergy solutions. With thousands of customer installations acrossNorth America, Electric City has been reducing customers'operating costs for over 20 years. By linking its customers'sites, the Company is developing large-scale, dispatchable, demandresponse systems we call Virtual Negawatt Power Plan. The Companyis developing its first VNPP(R) development - a 50-Megawattnegative power system for ComEd in Northern Illinois, a second 27-Megawatt system with PacifiCorp in the Salt Lake City area, and apilot program in Ontario, Canada with Enersource.ELEPHANT TALK: Posts $487,146 Net Loss in 2006 First Fiscal Qtr.----------------------------------------------------------------Elephant Talk Communications, Inc., filed its first quarterfinancial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2006,with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 22, 2006.The Company reported a $487,146 net loss on $2,173,260 of revenuesfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $14,559,744in total assets, $11,259,757 in total liabilities, $950,016 inminority interest, and $2,349,971 stockholders' equity.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $4,051,485 in total current assets available to pay$7,833,427 in total current liabilities coming due within the next12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for freehttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a07 Going Concern DoubtJimmy C. H. Cheung & Co., in Hong Kong, raised substantial doubtabout Elephant Talk Communications, Inc.'s ability to continue asa going concern after auditing the Company's consolidatedfinancial statements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005. Theauditor pointed to the Company's loss, negative working capital,and stockholders' and accumulated deficiencies.Elephant Talk Communications, Inc., is a voice-over-internet-protocol telecommunications and mobile short message service andother value added telecom services provider in China. With itscompletion of acquisition of Beijing China Wind, the Companyprovides its mobile value added services to over 1 millioncustomers in China. Its services include short message service,ring tone/wall-paper downloads and mobile e-commerce services.Its international call services are provided through an integratednetwork infrastructure comprising both the packet-switched systemand circuit switched system focusing on the Asia Pacific regionand the U.S.ENRON CORP: Ct. Dismisses Suit v. Caisse de Depot & Australia Bank------------------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Arthur J. Gonzalez of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of New York dismissed an adversaryproceeding Enron Corporation and its debtor-affiliates commencedto recover payments to Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec andNational Australia Bank. CLO TransactionIn December 1999, Enron monetized a portfolio of loan facilitiesowned by Enron North America Corp. and certain other Enronaffiliates pursuant to a \"collateralized loan obligation\"transaction. Several entities were formed including ENA CLO IHolding Company I L.P. and ENA CLO I Trust in connection with theCLO transaction.As part of the CLO transaction, the contents of the portfolio ofloan facilities were transferred to CLO Holding. The CLO Trustissued several classes of notes with maturities in 2014. Theproceeds of the CLO Notes were used to purchase the sole limitedpartnership interest in CLO Holding.Security for the Notes was provided by CLO Trust's limitedpartnership interest in CLO Holding, without recourse to CLOTrust or any other entity. Thus, the source of funds from whichthe CLO Trust could make payments to holders of the CLO Notes wasCLO Holding. Repayment of the CLO Notes was dependent uponpayment to CLO Holding by the obligors of the collateralizedloans included in the portfolio of loan facilities.In 2000, the value of CLO Holding's portfolio of loan facilitiesdeclined. In September 2000, Enron provided credit support forthe Notes by granting a \"put option\" to CLO Holding. Enron wasobligated to purchase from CLO Holding up to $113,000,000 indefaulted portfolio loans. Enron did not receive a premiumpayment in return for its granting of the put option.In December 2000 and, again, in June 2001, CLO Holding exercisedits rights pursuant to the put option. CLO Holding transferredthe funds received as a result of exercising its rights under theput option to the CLO Trust. In turn, the CLO Trust transferredthe Put Transfers to certain holders of CLO Notes, includingCaisse de Depot and Australia Bank.In exchange, the subsequent transferees of the Put Transferstransferred their CLO Notes to Enron.The portfolio of loan facilities continued to decline in value asa result of payment defaults on the underlying loans. In spring2001, Enron purchased all of the then-outstanding CLO Notes fromcertain of the holders at face value plus accrued interest. Theprice Enron paid to purchase the CLO Notes was above marketvalue. Enron Wants to Avoid Put TransfersIn 2003, Enron sued institutional investors holding the CLONotes, including Caisse de Depot and Australia Bank. Enronalleged that the Put Transfers are avoidable, pursuant to Section548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code, as constructive fraudulenttransfers of its interest in property. Enron argued that the PutTransfers were recoverable from the defendants as mediatetransferees pursuant to Section 550(a)(2).Caisse de Depot and Australia Bank sought dismissal of thecomplaint. The Defendants argued that as mediate, or subsequent,transferees of the Put Transfers, the transfers of a debtor'sinterest in property must be avoided under the Bankruptcy Codeagainst the initial transferee prior to Enron seeking recoveryfrom them pursuant to Section 550(a).The Defendants asserted that they were two-steps removed from thealleged fraudulent transfers. They pointed out that after CLOHolding exercised the put option, Enron paid the funds to CLOHolding as initial transferee. In turn, CLO Holding transferredthe funds to the CLO Trust, an immediate transferee. The CLOTrust then distributed those funds to holders of the CLO Notes,including the Defendants.The Defendants also argued that Enron's failure to bring anavoidance action against the initial transferee resulted from itsown decision not to commence the action prior to the running ofthe statute of limitations. To the extent Enron argues, inequity, that an avoidance action could not be brought within thestatute of limitations because CLO Holdings, as the initialtransferee, was dissolved, the Defendants assert that Enronitself caused the dissolution.Enron countered that it may seek recovery from mediatetransferees regardless of whether it has first avoided thetransfers as to the initial transferee. Enron said it mustmerely establish that the transfers are avoidable. Court Dismisses ActionJudge Gonzalez found merit on the Defendants' arguments. Indismissing the complaint, Judge Gonzalez held that the plainlanguage of Section 550(a) requires that the transfer first beestablished as improper and avoided under one of the avoidancesections of the Bankruptcy Code prior to actual recovery from anytransferee. Because Enron's complaint does not seek to initiallyavoid the transfer as against the initial transferee, thecomplaint seeking recovery from the Defendants is properlydismissed as against them.Allowing Enron to merely show that the initial transfer wasavoidable prior to recovery rather than actually establishingthat it were avoided would lead to an absurd result in thecontext of the two separate statutes of limitations found inSections 546(a) and 550(f), Judge Gonzalez said. Section 550(a)applies to the recovery from the initial transferee as well as torecovery from subsequent transferees. Section 550(f) providesthe applicable statute of limitations for recovery actions underSection 550(a).According to Judge Gonzalez, if Enron were only necessary toestablish that the transfer was avoidable, then the Section546(a) statute of limitations for commencing an avoidance actionwould be rendered nugatory; as the trustee could still recovereven from the initial transferee under the \"avoidable\" theoryeven though an avoidance action had not been commenced within therequisite two-year statute of limitations.Even if equitable considerations were sufficient to eliminate thestatutory requirement that the transfer first be avoided, JudgeGonzalez said the equitable arguments presented by Enron wouldnot warrant avoidance of the Put Transfers because Enron hadopportunity to bring the avoidance action against the initialtransferee and Enron, itself, caused the dissolution of theinitial transferee, making the avoidance action against theinitial transferee impossible. About EnronHeadquartered in Houston, Texas, Enron Corporation filed forchapter 11 protection on December 2, 2001 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. CaseNo. 01-16033) following controversy over accounting procedures,which caused Enron's stock price and credit rating to dropsharply. Judge Gonzalez confirmed the Company's Modified FifthAmended Plan on July 15, 2004, and numerous appeals followed. TheDebtors' confirmed chapter 11 Plan took effect on Nov. 17, 2004.Martin J. Bienenstock, Esq., and Brian S. Rosen, Esq., at Weil,Gotshal & Manges, LLP, represent the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts. Luc A. Despins, Esq., Matthew Scott Barr,Esq., and Paul D. Malek, Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy,LLP, represent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.(Enron Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 173; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 15/945-7000)ENRON CORP: Asks Court to Approve United Illuminating Settlement----------------------------------------------------------------Reorganized Enron Corporation and its debtor-affiliates ask JudgeArthur J. Gonzalez of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York to approve their settlement agreement withThe United Illuminating Company, and UIL Holdings Corporation.Before the Debtors filed for bankruptcy, Enron Power Marketing,Inc., entered into various transactions with United Illuminating,pursuant to which certain amounts are owed to EPMI. As creditsupport for the contracts, Enron Corp. and UIL Holdings eachissued certain guaranties, Mark C. Ellenberg, Esq., at Cadwalader,Wickersham & Taft LLP, in New York, relates.On Jan. 31, 2003, EPMI filed Adversary Proceeding No. 03-02065against the UIL Parties, seeking declaratory relief and damagesunder some of the Contracts.The UIL Parties filed their answer and affirmative defenses toEPMI's allegations on March 6, 2003.Following discussions, the parties negotiated the SettlementAgreement. They agree that: (1) the UIL Parties will make a settlement payment to the applicable Reorganized Debtor or Debtor; (2) they will mutually release each other from all claims related to the Contracts and Guaranties; (3) they will execute a stipulation providing for the dismissal, with prejudice, of the Adversary Proceeding; (4) two general unsecured claims will be deemed as filed by United Illuminating and automatically allowed as: (i) a Class 6 Claim for $7,900,000 in favor of Bear Stearns Investment Products, Inc., as assignee of United Illuminating, against EPMI; and (ii) a Class 185 Claim for $7,900,000 in favor of Bear Stearns, as assignee of United Illuminating, against Enron; and (5) All scheduled liabilities in favor of the UIL Parties will be deemed irrevocably withdrawn, with prejudice, and to the extent applicable, expunged in their entirety.Headquartered in Houston, Texas, Enron Corporation filed forchapter 11 protection on December 2, 2001 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. CaseNo. 01-16033) following controversy over accounting procedures,which caused Enron's stock price and credit rating to dropsharply. Judge Gonzalez confirmed the Company's Modified FifthAmended Plan on July 15, 2004, and numerous appeals followed. TheDebtors' confirmed chapter 11 Plan took effect on Nov. 17, 2004.Martin J. Bienenstock, Esq., and Brian S. Rosen, Esq., at Weil,Gotshal & Manges, LLP, represent the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts. Luc A. Despins, Esq., Matthew Scott Barr,Esq., and Paul D. Malek, Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy,LLP, represent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.(Enron Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 173; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 15/945-7000)ENRON CORP: Broadband Unit Demands $1.01M Debt Payment from i2--------------------------------------------------------------Enron Broadband Services, Inc., provided services and products toi2 Technologies, Inc., pursuant to a Network Services Agreement,dated as of September 17, 2000.Barry J. Dichter, Esq., at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, inNew York, relates that i2 Technologies presently owes a$1,014,912 matured debt to EBS that is past due.The matured debt includes $223,898 of interest calculated asprescribed in the Services Agreement from the due date of theapplicable invoice through March 31, 2006.EBS has made a demand on i2 Technologies for payment of amountsthat it owes to EBS, but until now, i2 has refused the pay itsobligations, Mr. Dichter tells Judge Gonzalez.Hence, EBS asks the Court to: (1) declare that i2 Technologies owes a $1,014,912 matured debt to EBS and compel i2 to pay its obligations; (2) declare that i2 Technologies' failure to pay the matured debt constitutes a violation of Sections 362(a)(3), 362(a)(7) and 542(b) of the Bankruptcy Code; and (3) award EBS its costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred in connection with its efforts to obtain i2 Technologies' compliance with its obligations, together with accrued interest.Headquartered in Houston, Texas, Enron Corporation filed forchapter 11 protection on December 2, 2001 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. CaseNo. 01-16033) following controversy over accounting procedures,which caused Enron's stock price and credit rating to dropsharply. Judge Gonzalez confirmed the Company's Modified FifthAmended Plan on July 15, 2004, and numerous appeals followed. TheDebtors' confirmed chapter 11 Plan took effect on Nov. 17, 2004.Martin J. Bienenstock, Esq., and Brian S. Rosen, Esq., at Weil,Gotshal & Manges, LLP, represent the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts. Luc A. Despins, Esq., Matthew Scott Barr,Esq., and Paul D. Malek, Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy,LLP, represent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.(Enron Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 172; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 15/945-7000)ENTECH ENVIRONMENTAL: Posts $463,449 Net Loss in 2006 1st Quarter-----------------------------------------------------------------Entech Environmental Technologies, Inc., filed its first quarterfinancial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2006,with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 15, 2006.The Company reported a $463,449 net loss on $1,765,036 of revenuesfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $1,930,530in total assets and $2,891,181 in total liabilities, resulting ina $1,100,345 stockholders' deficit.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $1,411,571 in total current assets available to pay$2,891,181 in total current liabilities coming due within the next12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a16 Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Feb. 27, 2006,Mendoza Berger & Company, LLP, expressed substantial doubt aboutEntech Environmental Technologies, Inc.'s ability to continue asa going concern after it audited the Company's financialstatements for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2005. The auditingfirm pointed to the Company's significant losses.The Company's former auditors, Russell Bedford StefanouMirchandani LLP, also expressed substantial doubt about Entech'sability to continue as a going concern after auditing theCompany's financial statements for fiscal year 2004. About EntechEntech Environmental Technologies, Inc., fka Cyber PublicRelations, Inc., through its H.B. Covey subsidiary, providesconstruction and maintenance services to petroleum servicestations in the southwestern part of the United States of America,and provides installation services for consumer home products inSouthern California.The HBC subsidiary is a 58-year old construction and maintenancecompany that specializes in construction and maintenance servicesfor the retail petroleum industry, commercial and industrialusers, municipal organizations, and in support of major equipmentmanufacturers.EPIXTAR CORP: Morrison Brown Replaces McClain & Co. as Auditors---------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida inMiami authorized Epixtar Corp. and its debtor-affiliates to employMorrison, Brown, Argiz & Farra, LLP, as their auditors.The Debtors retained Morrison Brown to: a) audit their consolidated financial statements for the period ended Dec. 31, 2005, in connection with the filing of their form 10-K and any form 10-Q with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and b) perform other work necessary in connection with the preparation of and filing of any documents required by the SEC.The hourly rates for Morrison Brown's professionals expected towork on this engagement ranges from $150 to $400. Morrison Brownrequested a $50,000 retainer from the Debtors.Frank Gonzalez, at Morrison Brown, assures the Court that his firmis \"disinterested\" as that term is defined in Section 101(14) ofthe Bankruptcy Code.McClain & Company, LC, previously served as the Debtors' auditors.McClain withdrew from the engagement in April 2006 afterdisagreeing with the Debtors' management.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 29, 2006,McClain identified weaknesses in internal controls during itsaudit of the Debtor's financial statements for the year endedDec. 31, 2005. The control weaknesses eventually gave rise to thefirm's questions regarding the judgment of the Debtors'management. About EpixtarBased in Miami, Florida, Epixtar Corp. -- http://www.epixtar.com/-- fdba Global Assets Holding, Inc., aggregates contact centercapacity and robust telephony infrastructure to delivercomprehensive, turnkey services to the enterprise market. TheCompany and its debtor-affiliates filed for chapter 11 protectionon Oct. 6, 2005 (Bank. S.D. Fla. Case No. 05-42040). Michael D.Seese, Esq., at Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin, P.L., representsthe Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Glenn D. Moses, Esq.,at Genovese Joblove & Battista, P.A., represents the Company'sOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they listed total assets of$30,376,521 and total debts of $39,158,724.EPIXTAR CORP: EICCG Wants to Sell Accounts Receivable to WFCB-------------------------------------------------------------Debtor Epixtar International Call Center Group, Inc., asks theU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida inMiami for permission to: -- sell its pre-bankruptcy and post-bankruptcy accounts receivable to Wells Fargo Business Credit, Inc., free and clear of all liens; -- obtain debtor-in-possession financing from Wells Fargo pursuant to its factoring agreement; and -- grant Wells Fargo a super-priority lien and priority over administrative claims in relation to factored accounts receivable.Howard J. Berlin, Esq., at Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin, P.L.,tells the Court that EICCG's sale of its accounts receivable isnecessary for the continuing operation of its business. It willalso help preserve collateral value for the benefit of securedcreditors and maximize distributions to unsecured creditors. Factoring AgreementEICCG's factoring agreement with WFBC is essentially similar tothe factoring agreement between WFBC and another debtor, EpixtarMarketing Corp., which was previously approved by the Court.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Nov. 3, 2005, thefactoring agreement allows the Debtors to sell and assign certainof its accounts receivable to WFBC.In consideration for the assignment, WFBC pays the Debtors aninitial cash payment equal to 80% of the face of amount of thereceivable. Upon collection of the receivable, WCFB pays theDebtors the 20% balance, less customary fees and charges.The Debtors are required to repurchase the receivables in theevent that the account becomes disputed or uncollectible. Sincethe Debtors remain liable for the factored accounts pendingcollection by WFBC, the 80% initial payment is treated as advancedfunds and are considered as DIP loans. EICCG requires authorityto obtain financing from WFBC in light of the mechanics of theirfactoring agreement with WFBC. About EpixtarBased in Miami, Florida, Epixtar Corp. -- http://www.epixtar.com/-- fdba Global Assets Holding, Inc., aggregates contact centercapacity and robust telephony infrastructure to delivercomprehensive, turnkey services to the enterprise market. TheCompany and its debtor-affiliates filed for chapter 11 protectionon Oct. 6, 2005 (Bank. S.D. Fla. Case No. 05-42040). Michael D.Seese, Esq., at Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin, P.L., representsthe Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Glenn D. Moses, Esq.,at Genovese Joblove & Battista, P.A., represents the Company'sOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they listed total assets of$30,376,521 and total debts of $39,158,724.FORD MOTOR: S&P Puts Nine Related Debts' Low-B Ratings on Watch---------------------------------------------------------------Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its ratings on nine U.S.single-issue synthetic ABS transactions related to Ford Motor Co.(Ford; BB-/Watch Neg/B-2) and Ford Motor Credit Co. (Ford Credit;BB-/Watch Neg/B-2) on CreditWatch with negative implications.The May 25, 2006, placement of the ratings on Ford, Ford Credit,and all related entities on CreditWatch with negative implicationsdoes not have any immediate rating impact on the Ford-related ABSsupported by collateral pools of consumer auto loans or autowholesale loans.Each of the securitizations with ratings placed on CreditWatchnegative is weak-linked to the long-term corporate credit, seniorunsecured debt, or preferred stock ratings for Ford or FordCredit. Either Ford or Ford Credit provides the underlyingcollateral or referenced obligations in the affectedsecuritizations.The May 25, 2006, placement of Ford, Ford Credit, and all relatedentities on CreditWatch with negative implications reflectsStandard & Poor's increasing concerns about Ford's performance in2006 amid deteriorating product mix and market share in NorthAmerica and persistently high commodity costs generally.Ratings Placed On Creditwatch Negative: Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, Ford Motor Co. Debenture-Backed Series 2001-36 Trust Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- A-1 BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral A-2 BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, Ford Motor Co. Note-Backed Series 2003-6 Trust Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- A-1 BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral CorTS Trust for Ford Debentures Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- Cert. BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral CorTS Trust II for Ford Notes Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- Certs. BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral PPLUS Trust Series FMC-1 Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- Certs. BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral PreferredPLUS Trust Series FRD-1 Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- Certs. BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral SATURNS Trust No. 2003-5 Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- Units BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral Trust Certificates Series 2002-1 Trust Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- A-1 BB-/Watch Neg. BB- Underlying collateral STEERS Credit-Backed Trust Series 2002-3 F Rating Class To From Role ----- -- ---- ---- Certs. B-/Watch Neg. B- Referenced obligationFRIENDLY ICE: Posts $1.8 Mil. Net Loss in 1st Quarter Ended Apr. 2------------------------------------------------------------------Friendly Ice Cream Corporation incurred a $1.8 million net lossfor the first quarter ended April 2, 2006, compared to a net lossof $3 million reported for the three months ended April 3, 2005.Total revenues were $125.7 million in the first quarter of 2006,an increase of $4 million, or 3.3%, as compared to total revenuesof $121.7 million for the first quarter of 2005. Revenuesincreased in all business segments.Restaurant revenues were $95.3 million in the first quarter of2006, an increase of $2.2 million, or 2.3%, as compared torestaurant revenues of $93.1 million for the first quarter of2005. Comparable restaurant sales increased 4.8% for company-operated restaurants and 0.6% for franchised restaurants for thequarter ended April 2, 2006 compared to the quarter ended April 3,2005. Restaurant revenues include a reduction of $3.2 million dueto the re-franchising of 16 company-operated restaurants over thelast fifteen months.Foodservice revenues were $26.9 million in the first quarter of2006, an increase of $1.6 million, or 6.3%, as compared tofoodservice revenues of $25.3 million for the first quarter of2005. Franchise revenues were $3.5 million in the first quarterof 2006, an increase of $0.2 million, or 9.1%, as compared tofranchise revenues of $3.3 million for the first quarter of 2005.As of Jan. 1, 2006, the Company had 11 restaurants that werereported as \"held for sale\" in accordance with Statement ofFinancial Accounting Standards No. 144, \"Accounting for theImpairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets\".During the quarter ended April 2, 2006, the Company sold five ofthese restaurants. These transactions resulted in gross proceedsof $5.1 million and a net gain on disposal of $2.9 million.The net gain on disposal, along with the operating results of theproperties held for sale, was reported separately as discontinuedoperations. Income from discontinued operations was $2.6 millionin the 2006 first quarter as compared to a loss from discontinuedoperations of $0.4 million in the prior year first quarter.As a result of the loss for the current quarter and the Company'sintent to continue recording a full valuation allowance ondeferred tax assets until an appropriate level of profitability issustained, the benefit from income taxes was $0.0 million for thethree months ended April 2, 2006. The benefit from income taxeswas $0.7 million for the three months ended April 3, 2005. Performance HighlightsIn the first quarter of 2006, Friendly's continued to pursue itskey strategic objectives to 1) stabilize and improve profit incompany-operated restaurants, 2) aggressively grow throughfranchising and 3) stabilize and improve profit in its retailbusiness. Key business highlights for the quarter include: -- Ongoing improvements to the Friendly's dining experience based on feedback from the new Internet-based guest feedback system; -- The opening of one new company-operated restaurant; -- The re-franchising of one company-operated restaurant, which resulted in a gain on franchise sales of restaurant operations and properties of $0.9 million; and -- Continued growth in the number of supermarket chains that carry Friendly's decorated cakes, which are now being sold in 700 supermarkets.John L. Cutter, Chief Executive Officer and President of FriendlyIce Corporation stated, \"We are pleased with our first quarterresults. Comparable sales of 4.8% for company-operatedrestaurants exceeded our expectations.\"We believe we have the right strategies in place to support long-term sales and profitability growth. Our current marketingmessage is especially relevant in a challenging consumerenvironment.\"Each promotion features one to three new products combined with avalue added free sundae. With these promotions, we have launcheda television campaign with a new tag line \"Get in. Get Friendly.\"The commercials feature families sharing memorable moments overfood and ice cream at Friendly's. The tag line re-enforces theessence of the brand.\"Friendly Ice Cream Corporation (AMEX: FRN) -- http://www.friendlys.com/-- is a vertically integrated restaurant company serving signature sandwiches, entrees and ice creamdesserts in a friendly, family environment in 530 company andfranchised restaurants throughout the Northeast. The company alsomanufactures ice cream, which is distributed through more than4,500 supermarkets and other retail locations. With a 70-yearoperating history, Friendly's enjoys strong brand recognition andis currently remodeling its restaurants and introducing newproducts to grow its customer base. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on March 24, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its corporate creditrating on restaurant operator Friendly Ice Cream Corp. to 'B-'from 'B'. The senior unsecured debt rating was also lowered to'CCC+' from 'B-'. The outlook is negative.FTS GROUP: Posts $5.9 Million Net Loss in 2006 1st Fiscal Quarter-----------------------------------------------------------------FTS Group, Inc., filed its first quarter financial statements forthe three months ended March 31, 2006, with the Securities andExchange Commission on May 15, 2006.The Company reported a $5,955,143 net loss on $1,633,614 ofrevenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $7,151,691in total assets, $5,637,860 in total liabilities, and $1,513,831in stockholders' equity.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $1,096,833 in total current assets available to pay$3,885,009 in total current liabilities coming due within the next12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a12 Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 15, 2006,R. E. Bassie & Co. in Houston, Texas, raised substantial doubtabout FTS Group, Inc.'s ability to continue as a going concernafter auditing the Company's consolidated financial statements forthe year ended Dec. 31, 2005. The auditor pointed to theCompany's recurring losses from operations. About FTS GroupFTS Group, Inc., develops and acquires businesses primarilyin the wireless industry. Through FTS Wireless, Inc., awholly-owned subsidiary, acquires and develops a chain ofretail wireless locations in the Gulf Coast market of Florida. Asof March 1, 2006, the Company operates nine retail wirelesslocations in Florida.FUNCTIONAL RESTORATION: Hires SulmeyerKupetz as Bankruptcy Counsel------------------------------------------------------------------Functional Restoration Medical Center, Inc., obtained permissionfrom the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District ofCalifornia to employ SulmeyerKupetz as its bankruptcy counsel.SulmeyerKupetz will: a) examine the creditors' claims to determine their validity; b) advise and counsel the Debtor in connection with legal issues, including: i) use of cash collateral, ii) sale or lease of property of the estate, iii) obtain credit, iv) assumption and rejection of unexpired leases and executory contracts, v) request for security interests, vi) relief from automatic stay, and vii) payment of prepetition debts; c) negotiate with the creditors holding potentially secured and unsecured claims for a plan of reorganization; d) draft a chapter 11 plan and disclosure statement; and e) object to claims as may be appropriate.Daniel A. Lev, Esq., a member at SulmeyerKupetz, disclosed thatthe Firm's professionals bill: Professional Hourly Rate ------------ ----------- Members and Senior Counsel $375 - $600 Of Counsel $375 - $500 Associates $250 - $400SulmeyerKupetz received a $50,000 prepetition retainer with aremaining balance of $48,961.Mr. Lev assured the Court that his Firm is disinterested as thatterm is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Encino, California, Functional RestorationMedical Center, Inc. is the second largest owner and operator ofMRI centers in Southern California. The Debtor filed for chapter11 protection on Mar. 9, 2006 (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 06-10306). Daniel A. Lev, Esq., at SulmeyerKupetz, represents theDebtor in its restructuring efforts. When the Debtor filed forprotection from its creditors, its estimated assets and debtsbetween $10 million and $50 million.FUNCTIONAL RESTORATION: Panel Hires Pachulski Stang as Counsel--------------------------------------------------------------The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors appointed in thebankruptcy case of Functional Restoration Medical Center, Inc.,asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District ofCalifornia for authority to employ Pachulski Stang Ziehl YoungJones & Weintraub LLP as its counsel.Pachulski Stang will: a) assist, advise, and represent the Committee in its consultations with the Debtor regarding the administration of this case; b) assist, advice, and represent the Committee in analyzing the Debtor's assets and liabilities, investigating the extent and validity of liens and participating in and reviewing any proposed asset sales, any asset dispositions, financing arrangements and cash collateral stipulations or proceedings; c) assist, advise, and represent the Committee in any manner relevant to reviewing and determining the Debtor's rights and obligations under leases and other executory contracts; d) assist, advise, and represent the Committee in investigating acts, conduct, assets, liabilities and the Debtor's financial condition, the Debtor's business operation and the desirability of the continuance of any portion of the business, and any other matters relevant to this case or to the formulation of a plan; e) assist, advise, and represent the Committee in its participation in the negotiation, formulation, and drafting of a plan of liquidation or reorganization; f) provide advice to the Committee on the issues concerning the appointment of a trustee or examiner under Section 1104 of the Bankruptcy Code; g) assist, advise, and represent the Committee in the performance of all of its duties and powers under the Bankruptcy Code and the Bankruptcy Rules and in the performance other services as are in the interests of those represented by the Committee; and h) assist, advise, and represent the Committee in the evaluation of claims and on any litigation matters.Hamid R. Rafatjoo, Esq., at Pachulski Stang, discloses that hebills at $395 per hour. A copy of the hourly rates for the Firm'sother attorneys and paralegals is available for free at: http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a0dMr. Rafatjoo assures the Court that the firm is a \"disinterestedperson\" as the term is defined in Section 101(14) of theBankruptcy Code and does not hold or represent any interestadverse to the Debtors' estates.Headquartered in Encino, California, Functional RestorationMedical Center, Inc. is the second largest owner and operator ofMRI centers in Southern California. The Debtor filed for chapter11 protection on Mar. 9, 2006 (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 06-10306). Daniel A. Lev, Esq., at SulmeyerKupetz, represents theDebtor in its restructuring efforts. XRoads Solutions Group, LLC,serves as its financial advisor. When the Debtor filed forprotection from its creditors, its estimated assets and debtsbetween $10 million and $50 million.FUNCTIONAL RESTORATION: Taps Xroads Solutions as Financial Advisor------------------------------------------------------------------Functional Restoration Medical Center, Inc., obtained authorityfrom the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District ofCalifornia to employ XRoads Solutions Group, LLC, as its financialadvisor.XRoads Solutions will: a. assist the Debtor in preparing operating budgets and cash forecasts; b. analyze and advise the Debtor on restructuring alternatives; c. assist the Debtor and its legal counsel, SulmeyerKupetz, P.C., in negotiations with the Debtor's creditor constituencies; d. assist the Debtor in the sale of assets; e. assist the Debtor and counsel in the preparation of schedules, statements of financial affairs, monthly operating reports, and other reports for the Court and the U.S Trustee; f. manage claims, including analysis and reconciliation of unsecured claims, identification and analysis of claims for objection, providing documentation to support objections, and providing analysis and support as requested by the counsel; and g. submit a 30-day work plan to the counsel starting on the second month of retention, and perform the projects set forth in the work plan.The Debtor told the Court that for the first month of the Firm'sservices, the Debtor will pay the Firm a flat fee of $40,000 forno less than 400 hours of work. Accordingly, the Firm will chargean effective blended rate of $100 per hour, or less.For the second and subsequent months, the Debtor will pay the Firma monthly fee of $40,000 and the Firm will make its personnelavailable for at least 175 hours per month. The Debtor will paythe Firm at a rate of $275 per hour if the Firm's personnelperforms more than 175 hours in any month.John F. Walters, a principal at XRoads Solutions, assured theCourt that the Firm is disinterested as that term is defined inSection 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Encino, California, Functional RestorationMedical Center, Inc. is the second largest owner and operator ofMRI centers in Southern California. The Debtor filed for chapter11 protection on Mar. 9, 2006 (Bankr. C.D. Calif. Case No. 06-10306). Daniel A. Lev, Esq., at SulmeyerKupetz, represents theDebtor in its restructuring efforts. When the Debtor filed forprotection from its creditors, its estimated assets and debtsbetween $10 million and $50 million.GLOBAL HOME: Court Okays Conway as Restructuring Consultants------------------------------------------------------------Global Home Products, LLC and its debtor-affiliates obtainedpermission from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District ofDelaware to employ Conway, Del Genio, Gries & Co., LLC, as theirrestructuring consultant, nunc pro tunc to April 10, 2006.Conway Del Genio will: a. assist in managing the Debtors' resources in support of their restructuring and reorganization activities; b. assist in the preparation of reports, and communications with the Debtors' lenders and other constituencies; c. assist in analyzing the liquidity requirements of the Debtor and its three business units for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2007, based on the financial projections prepared by management for that period; d. assist in developing an operating plan and associated liquidity needs for the Debtor and its three business units; e. assist in connection with the filing of a Chapter 11 proceeding, including business plans and cash flow forecasts supporting the negotiation of Debtor-in- possession financing; f. assist in the subsequent development, proposal, negotiation, and confirmation of a Plan of Reorganization; g. assist in establishing necessary operating and reporting disciplines to operate the business in a Chapter 11 proceeding; and h. assist in the development and execution of plans to dispose of non-core assets.Ronald F. Stengel, a senior managing director at Conway Del Genio,tells the Court that when the Debtors filed for bankruptcy, theFirm held a $77,000 retainer, and a $105,000 postpetition pro rataportion of the April monthly fee.Pursuant to an engagement agreement, the Debtors agreed to pay theFirm a monthly fee of $150,000, payable in advance each month.Mr. Stengel assures the Court that the Firm is disinterested asthat term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Westerville, Ohio, Global Home Products, LLC-- http://www.anchorhocking.com/and http://www.burnesgroup.com/-- sells houseware and home products and manufactures highquality glass products for consumers and the food servicesindustry. The company also designs and markets photo frames,photo albums and related home decor products. The company and16 of its affiliates , including Burnes Puerto Rico, Inc., andMirro Puerto Rico, Inc., filed for Chapter 11 protection on Apr.10, 2006 (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 06-10340). Laura Davis Jones,Esq., Bruce Grohsgal, Esq., James E. O'Neill, Esq., and SandraG.M. Selzer, Esq., at Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl, Young, Jones &Weintraub LLP, represent the Debtors. Bruce Buechler, Esq., atLowenstein Sandler P.C., represents the Official Committee OfUnsecured Creditors. When the company filed for protection fromtheir creditors, they estimated assets between US$50 million andUS$100 million and debts of more than US$100 million.GSI GROUP: Repurchases Part of 12% Senior Notes for $7.4 Million----------------------------------------------------------------On May 12, 2006, GSI Group Inc. repurchased a portion of itsoutstanding 12% senior notes due in 2013 from Charlesbank, themajority shareholder of GSI Holdings, Inc., which is the parentcorporation of GSI Group, at 101% of the principal amount, in atotal cash amount of $7,474,000. The Notes will be promptlycancelled following the repurchase.The repurchase price for the notes was approved by all of theindependent members of the Company's board of directors, and wasdetermined after consulting with Lehman Brothers for the mostrecent trading price for the notes, and also taking into accountthat the record date for the semi-annual payment of interest onthe notes was May 1, 2006 for payment on May 15, 2006.The effect of the transaction is to reduce the direct financialobligations of the Company with respect to its long-termindebtedness.Based in Assumption, Illinois, GSI Group Inc. is one of thelargest global manufacturers of grain storage bins and relateddrying and handling systems, as well as capital equipment forswine and poultry producers. GSI markets its products inapproximately 75 countries through a network of more than 2,500independent dealers to grain, protein producers and largecommercial businesses. In May 2005, GSI was acquired byCharlesbank Capital Partners, a Boston-based private equity firmknown for partnering with experienced management teams to growfundamentally strong businesses. * * *GSI Group Inc.'s 12% Senior Unsecured Notes due 2013 carry Moody'sInvestors Service's B3 rating and Standard and Poor's B- rating.GULF COAST: Creditors Panel Wants Winstead Sechrest as Counsel--------------------------------------------------------------The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors appointed in GulfCoast Holdings, Inc.'s chapter 11 case asks the U.S. BankruptcyCourt for the Northern District of Texas for permission to hireWinstead Sechrest & Minick P.C. as its bankruptcy counsel.The Committee chose Winstead Sechrest for the firm's expertise,experience and knowledge practicing before bankruptcy courts.Winstead Sechrest will: (a) advise and consult with the Committee concerning legal questions arising in the administration of the Debtor's estate and the unsecured creditors' rights and remedies in connection with the estate; (b) assist the Committee in preserving and protecting the Debtor's estate; (c) investigate and, with Court authority, prosecute preference, fraudulent transfers, and other actions arising under the Debtor's avoiding powers; (d) prepare and prosecute any pleadings, motions, answers, notices, orders and any reports that are required for the protection of the Committee's interest and the orderly administration of the Debtors' estate; (e) advise the Committee regarding the negotiation and documentation of debt restructuring and related transactions or agreements; (f) monitor transactions proposed by the Debtor during the course of its chapter 11 cases and advise the Committee; (g) review the nature and validity of liens asserted against the Debtor's property and advise the Committee concerning the enforceability of those liens; (h) review and monitor the Debtor's ongoing business, if any; (i) advise the Committee in connection with any suggested or proposed plans of reorganization; (j) will counsel the Committee in connection with the formulation, negotiation, and promulgation of alternative plans of reorganization, if necessary or appropriate; and (k) perform any and all of the legal services for the Committee.Phillip L. Lamberson, Esq., a partner at the firm, tells the Courtthat he charges $350 per hour for his services. He furtherdiscloses that his colleagues at the firm working for the Debtor'scase and their hourly rates are: Professionals Hourly Rate ------------- ----------- C. Mark Brannum $380 J. Frasher Murphy $295 Jaime Myers $265Mr. Lamberson assures the Court that his firm and itsprofessionals do not hold material interest adverse to theDebtor's estate and are disinterested as that term is defined inSection 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Conroe, Texas, Gulf Coast Holdings, Inc., fieldfor bankruptcy protection on April 28, 2006 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. CaseNo. 06-31695). Daniel I. Morenoff, Esq., and Jeffrey R. Fine,Esq., at Hughes & Luce, LLP, represent the Debtor in itsrestructuring efforts. In its schedules filed with the Court, theDebtor reported assets amounting to $18,258,575 and debts totaling$19,553,664.HAWS & TINGLE: Amends Chapter 11 Plan & Disclosure Statement------------------------------------------------------------Haws & Tingle, Ltd. delivered to the U.S. Bankruptcy for theNorthern District of Texas an amended disclosure statementexplaining its plan of reorganization.Under the Amended Plan, holders of Class 1 Other Priority Claimsand Class 2 Secured Tax Claims will receive either full payment incash or upon other terms agreed to by the holder and the Debtor.Class 3 Other Secured Claims will receive, at the Debtor's option: (i) the return of the collateral securing the Allowed Other Secured Claim in full satisfaction of the Claim; (ii) payment in cash in an amount equivalent to the lesser of (a) the value of the collateral or (b) the full amount of the Allowed Other Secured Claim; or (iii) other treatment as may be agreed to in writing by the holder of the Claim and the Debtor.If the Allowed Other Secured Claim exceeds the value of thecollateral, the excess will constitute a General Unsecured Claim,unless the holder of the Claim has elected treatment pursuant toSection 1111(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Class 4 General Unsecured Claims are entitled to a pro rata sharefrom funds left over after classes senior in priority have beenpaid in full.All interests in the Debtor will be cancelled, and interestholders will not retain any property on account of theirinterests. Claims of ZurichZurich American Insurance Company, the Debtor's bonding company,holds a stipulated $9,994,040 unsecured claim.Under the Amended Plan, as to any project where Zurich advancedfunds to complete an obligation of the Debtor, Zurich will beindemnified by the Debtor, and to a limited extent, by James D.Hasenzahl, the Debtor's chief executive officer.Zurich is also entitled to receive any payments from the owners ofthe projects entered into by the Debtor, up to the amount of fundsadvanced to pay for obligations of the Debtor on said projects.Zurich will receive funds directly from the Owners on projectswhere the Debtor defaulted, which funds are independent of theestate.In addition, Zurich is anticipated to have administrative claimsarising from settlements made with third parties. DistributionThe Plan Trustee will make all distributions required under thePlan. Zurich has agreed to fund $75,000 directly to the PlanTrustee from the settlement proceeds it receives from Mr.Hasenzahl.Headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas, Haws & Tingle, Ltd., is abuilding contractor. The Debtor filed for chapter 11 protectionon October 6, 2005 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Case No. 05-82478). MarkEdward Andrews, Esq., and Omar J. Alaniz, Esq., at Neligan TarpleyAndrews & Foley LLP represent the Debtor in its restructuringefforts. No Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has beenappointed in this case. When the Debtor filed for protection fromits creditors, it estimated assets and debts between $10 millionto $50 million.INVERNESS MEDICAL: Expects to Spend $16.8 Mil. on Plant Closures----------------------------------------------------------------As part of an ongoing review of its worldwide operations for thepurpose of improving efficiency, lowering operating costs andimproving margins, on May 16, 2006, Inverness Medical Innovations,Inc. committed to a plan to cease operations at its AppliedBiotech, Inc., and Scandinavian Micro Biodevices ApS subsidiaries,and to write-off certain excess manufacturing equipment at otherimpacted facilities.The Company made its final determination to implement therestructuring after completing its acquisition of a newlyconstructed manufacturing facility in Hangzhou, China from ACONLaboratories, Inc. and certain of its affiliates.After a period of transition, customers currently supplied withproduct manufactured at ABI will be supplied with productmanufactured in the Company's new facility in Hangzhou, China;while certain equipment and research activities currentlyconducted at SMB will be transferred to the Company's Bedford,England and Stirling, Scotland facilities. The ABI shutdown isexpected to be completed during the first quarter of 2007, whilethe closure of SMB is expected to be completed in the firstquarter of 2007.Total charges to be incurred in connection with the plant closingare expected to be approximately $16.8 million, includingseverance costs of approximately $4.8 million, other cashexpenditures of approximately $1.4 million, principally associatedwith lease termination costs, and non-cash fixed and current assetcharges totaling approximately $10.9 million.Offsetting these charges, the Company expects to record a non-cashforeign exchange gain of approximately $5.2 million associatedwith the completion of the previously announced closure of itsCDIL facility and a cash gain of approximately $1.0 millionassociated with the completion of the sale of its interest inCDIL's former principal manufacturing facility. The charges, netof the gains, will be recognized over the course of the plantclosing consistent with U.S. GAAP and are expected to beapproximately $6.6 million, $1.7 million and $2.0 million in thesecond quarter, third and fourth quarters of 2006 and $.7 millionin the first quarter of 2007.Savings generated though lower manufacturing costs and reducedgeneral and administrative expenses are expect to be $.7 millionduring 2006 and approximately $6.2 million during 2007 andthereafter. Additional savings are anticipated to be derived fromthe benefits of manufacturing in the anticipated lower costenvironment of the facility in Hangzhou, the timing and amount ofwhich will depend on the timing of product transfers andsubstitutions over the balance of 2006. About Inverness MedicalHeadquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts, Inverness MedicalInnovations, Inc. (Amex: IMA) -- http://www.invernessmedical.com/-- is a leading global developer of advanced diagnostic devicesand is presently exploring new opportunities for its proprietaryelectrochemical and other technologies in a variety ofprofessional diagnostic and consumer-oriented applicationsincluding immuno-diagnostics with a focus on women's health andcardiology. The Company's new product development efforts, aswell as its position as a leading supplier of consumer pregnancyand fertility/ovulation tests and rapid point-of-care diagnostics,are supported by the strength of its intellectual propertyportfolio. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on July 7, 2005,Moody's Investors Service downgraded Inverness MedicalInnovations, Inc.'s Corporate Family Rating to B3 from B2;$150 million Senior Subordinated Notes to Caa3 from Caa1; SeniorUnsecured Issuer Rating to Caa1 from B3. Moody's said the outlookremains negative.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 6, 2005,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings onInverness Medical Innovations Inc., including the corporate creditrating to 'B' from 'B+'. S&P said the outlook is stable.IWT TESORO: McGladrey & Pullen Raises Going Concern Doubt---------------------------------------------------------McGladrey & Pullen, LLP, in New Haven, Connecticut, raisedsubstantial doubt about IWT Tesoro Corporation's ability tocontinue as a going concern after auditing the Company'sconsolidated financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31,2005. The auditor pointed to the Company's recurring losses fromoperations, and working capital and stockholders' deficiencies.The Company reported a $4,343,457 net loss on $55,589,223 of netsales for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005.At Dec. 31, 2005, the Company's balance sheet showed $46,962,569in total assets and $51,139,371 in total liabilities, resulting ina $4,176,802 stockholders' deficit.The Company's Dec. 31 balance sheet also showed strained liquiditywith $43,828,261 in total current assets available to pay$44,453,340 in total current liabilities coming due within thenext 12 months.A full-text copy of the Company's 2005 Annual Report is availablefor free at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a1fIWT Tesoro Corporation (OTCBB: IWTT) -- http://www.iwttesoro.com/-- is as a wholesale distributor of building materials,specifically hard floor and wall coverings, which consist ofceramic, porcelain and natural stone floor, wall and decorativetile. The Company imports a majority of these products fromsuppliers and manufacturers in Europe, South America, and the Nearand Far East.J. CREW: Earns $3.8 Million in Fiscal Year Ended Jan. 28, 2006--------------------------------------------------------------J. Crew Group, Inc., earned $3.8 million of net income on $953.2million of net revenues for the year ended Jan. 28, 2006, comparedto a $100.3 million net loss on $901.4 million of net revenues forthe year ended Jan. 29, 2005.Cash provided by operating activities decreased by $2 million to$56.8 million in fiscal year 2005 compared to $58.8 million in2004. Cash provided by operating activities in fiscal 2005consisted of net income of $3.8 million and non-cash adjustmentsof $76.8 million, reduced by an increase in working capital of$23.8 million.The increase in working capital consisted primarily of an increasein inventories of $28.1 million, offset by an increase in accountspayable and other current liabilities of $10.1 million.Inventories were higher than prior years due to expected salesincreases in Spring 2006, and the earlier receipt of a portion ofthese inventories.The increase in accounts payable and other current liabilities wasprimarily due to a $7.3 million increase in accounts payable whichis attributable to the increase in inventories.As of Jan. 28, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed totalassets of $337.3 million and total debts of $925.2 millionresulting in $587.8 million deficit.A full-text copy of J. Crew Group's Annual Report is available forfree at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a18Headquartered in New York, J. Crew Group, Inc. -- http://www.jcrew.com/-- is a multi-channel apparel retailer that operates 159 retail stores, 44 factory outlet stores, and acatalogue business. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 26, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its 'B' rating and '3'recovery rating to J. Crew Operating Corp.'s $285 million termloan and listed that rating on CreditWatch with positiveimplications.JERNBERG INDUSTRIES: Wants Court to Approve PBGC Settlement Accord------------------------------------------------------------------Richard J. Mason, the chapter 7 trustee appointed in theliquidation cases of JII Liquidating, Inc., fka JernbergIndustries, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates, asks the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois to approvea settlement agreement with the Pension Benefit GuarantyCorporation pertaining to the termination of Old Jernberg'sdefined benefit pension plan and the appointment of PBGC astrustee.Michael M. Schmahl, Esq., at McGuireWoods LLP, in Chicago,Illinois, reminds the Court that on Sept. 7, 2005, Old Jernbergsold substantially all of its operating assets pursuant to a thirdparty. Effective October 10, 2005, the cases were converted tocases under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, and Mr. Mason wasappointed as trustee.When Old Jernberg and its affiliates filed for bankruptcyprotection they maintained for their employees certain definedcontribution benefit plans, and Old Jernberg maintained forcertain of its employees a defined benefit plan, known as the\"Jernberg Hourly Pension Plan.\"Pursuant to an earlier Court order, the termination and wind-upof the Defined Contribution Plans by the Trustee was approved.The Trustee is thus in the process of terminating the DefinedContribution Plans. The Defined Benefit Plan, certain benefitsof which are guaranteed by the PBGC, maintains approximately$10.3 million in assets and has approximately 659 participants,some of whom are now employed by New Jernberg. Investors Bank &Trust Company is presently acting as the trustee of the trustforming a part of the Defined Benefit Plan. The PBGC has advisedthe Trustee that the Defined Benefit Plan is substantiallyunderfunded.The PBGC has also advised the chapter 7 trustee that it will filesubstantial priority or secured claims against the Debtors. Sincehis appointment, the chapter 7 trustee has attempted to cooperatewith the PBGC in his efforts relative to the termination of theDefined Benefit Plan.Pursuant to Section 4042(c) of the Employee Retirement IncomeSecurity Act of 1974, as amended, PBGC can enter into an agreementwith the plan administrator of a defined benefit pension plansubject to Title IV of ERISA as to the termination of the plan andas to the appointment of a trustee. PBGC now proposes to enterinto an agreement with the Trustee titled \"Agreement forTermination of Plan and Appointment of Trustee.\"The principal features of the Proposed Agreement are that: (a) the Defined Benefit Plan will be terminated as of September 7, 2005; and (b) the PBGC will be appointed trustee of the Defined Benefit Plan.Mr. Schmahl contends that the proposed agreement will also relievethe chapter 7 trustee of any ongoing burdens arising fromadministration of the Defined Benefit Plan.Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, Jernberg Industries, Inc., --http://www.jernberg.com/-- is a press forging company that manufactures formed and machined products. The Company and itsdebtor-affiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on June 29, 2005(Bankr. N.D. Ill. Case No. 05-25909). Jerry L. Switzer, Jr.,Esq., at Jenner & Block LLP, represented the Debtors. When theDebtors filed for chapter 11 protection, they estimated assets anddebts of $50 million to $100 million. CM&D Management Services,LLC's A. Jeffery Zappone served as the Debtors' ChiefRestructuring Officer. The Bankruptcy Court converted theDebtors' chapter 11 case to a chapter 7 liquidation proceeding onSept. 26, 2005.KIWA BIO-TECH: Posts $184,443 Net Loss in 2006 1st Fiscal Quarter-----------------------------------------------------------------Kiwa Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation filed its financialstatements for the three months ended March 31, 2006, with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on May 16, 2006.The Company reported a $184,443 net loss on $11,023 of total salesfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $3,102,076in total assets, $1,446,316 in total liabilities, and $611,367 instockholders' equity.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $1,244,026 in total current assets available to pay$2,267,127 in total current liabilities coming due within the next12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?9fc Going Concern DoubtMao & Company, CPAs, Inc., in New York, New York, raisedsubstantial doubt about Kiwa Bio-Tech Products Group Corporation'sability to continue as a going concern after auditing theCompany's consolidated financial statements for the year endedDec. 31, 2005. The auditing firm pointed to the Company'soperating losses and working capital and net capital deficits.Headquartered in City of Industry, California, Kiwa Bio-TechProducts Group Corporation (OTCBB: KWBT.OB) -- http://www.kiwabiotech.com/ -- develops, manufactures, distributes, and markets innovative, cost-effective andenvironmentally safe bio-technological products for agriculture,natural resources and environmental conservation.KL INDUSTRIES: Hires Laner Muchin as Special Labor Counsel----------------------------------------------------------KL Industries, Inc., obtained authority from the U.S. BankruptcyCourt for the Northern District of Illinois to employ Laner,Muchin, Dombrow, Becker, Levin and Tominberg, Ltd., as its speciallabor counsel.Laner Muchin will: a. give the Debtor legal advice in the areas of labor law, employment law and employee benefits law; b. represent the Debtor with respect to its ongoing negotiations with the United Steelworkers, AFL-CIO, Local No. 2154-36, including but not limited to negotiating the Debtor's collective bargaining agreement with USW; c. assist the Debtor in taking action as may be necessary with respect to claims that may be asserted against the Debtor by the USW; and d. perform any and all other labor or employment related services on behalf of the Debtor which may be required to aid in the proper administration of its estate.Anthony E. Dombrow, Esq., a partner at Laner Muchin, tells theCourt that partners at the firm bill between $225 to $440 per hourwhile associates bill between $175 to $310 per hour.Mr. Dombrow assures the Court that his firm does not hold orrepresent any interest adverse to the Debtor or its estate.Mr. Dombrow can be reached at: Anthony E. Dombrow, Esq. Laner, Muchin, Dombrow, Becker, Levin and Tominberg, Ltd. 515 North State Street, Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60610 Tel: (312) 467-9800 Fax: (312) 467-9479Headquartered in Addison, Illinois, KL Industries, Inc.,manufactures springs, assemblies and other products for theautomotive and electronic markets. The Company does business asKL Spring & Stamping Division, KL Spring Division, KL StampingDivision, KL Assembly Division and American Metal FormingDivision. The Company filed for bankruptcy protection on May 2,2006 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. Case No. 06-04882). Peter J. Roberts,Esq., and Steven B. Towbin, Esq., at Shaw Gussis Fishman GlantzWolfson & Towbin LLC represent the Debtor in its restructuringefforts. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors hasretained Winston & Strawn LLP, to represent it in the Debtor'scase. When the Debtor filed for bankruptcy protection, itreported assets totaling between $1 million and $10 million anddebts amounting between $10 million to $50 million.KL INDUSTRIES: Court Approves RSM McGladrey as Financial Advisor----------------------------------------------------------------KL Industries obtained authority from the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtfor the Northern District of Illinois to employ RSM McGladreyInc., as its financial advisor.RSM McGladrey will: a. provide the Debtor with general financial restructuring advice; b. assist the Debtor in the preparation of all required filings in the Court including, but not limited to, bankruptcy schedules, statement of financial affairs, monthly operating reports, cash collateral budgets, etc.; c. assist the Debtor's management in valuing the Debtor's assets; d. market the Debtor's assets to potential purchases and evaluate any and all purchase offers for those assets; e. prepare for, meet with and present information to interested parties and their advisors; f. review financial information generated by the Debtor, including monthly operating reports, budgets and other analyses, for consistency and accuracy, and provide advice relating to financial and business issues; g. assist and advise the Debtor in developing, evaluating, structuring or negotiating the terms and conditions of a chapter 11 plan; h. prepare the Debtor's Federal and State income tax returns and all other tax compliance requirements; i. provide the Debtor with other financial advisory services as the Debtor may require during the course of its chapter 11 case; and j. provide testimony in Court.Scoot Peltz, managing director of RSM McGladrey, tells the Courtthat the Firm's professionals bill: Professionals Hourly Rate ------------- ----------- Managing Directors and Directors $350 - $470 Managers and Senior Managers $230 - $320 Staff Consultants $180 - $215 Administrative Personnel $100 -$125To the best of the Debtor's knowledge, the firm is disinterestedas that term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Addison, Illinois, KL Industries, Inc.,manufactures springs, assemblies and other products for theautomotive and electronic markets. The Company does business asKL Spring & Stamping Division, KL Spring Division, KL StampingDivision, KL Assembly Division and American Metal FormingDivision. The Company filed for bankruptcy protection on May 2,2006 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. Case No. 06-04882). Peter J. Roberts,Esq., and Steven B. Towbin, Esq., at Shaw Gussis Fishman GlantzWolfson & Towbin LLC represent the Debtor in its restructuringefforts. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors hasretained Winston & Strawn LLP, to represent it in the Debtor'scase. When the Debtor filed for bankruptcy protection, itreported assets totaling between $1 million and $10 million anddebts amounting between $10 million to $50 million.L-3 COMMS: Jury Awards OSI $125.6MM in Damages in N.Y. Suit-----------------------------------------------------------The jury in U.S. District Court for the District of New Yorkissued a verdict against L-3 Communications in a litigationarising out of a letter of intent between the Company and OSISystems, Inc., relating to the company's acquisition of thedetection systems business of PerkinElmer, Inc. OSI broughtcounterclaims against the company alleging that the companydefrauded OSI and breached fiduciary duties alleged to be owed toOSI.The jury awarded OSI $125.6 million in damages, including awardsof $33 million for compensatory damages and $92.6 million forpunitive damages. The company believes this verdict and thedamages awarded are inconsistent with the law and evidencepresented. The company intends to move to have the verdict setaside and, if necessary, to appeal.Headquartered in New York City, L-3 Communications (NYSE: LLL) isa leading provider of Intelligence, Surveillance andReconnaissance systems, secure communications systems, aircraftmodernization, training and government services. The company is aleading merchant supplier of a broad array of high technologyproducts, including guidance and navigation, sensors, scanners,fuzes, data links, propulsion systems, simulators, avionics,electro optics, satellite communications, electrical powerequipment, encryption, signal intelligence, antennas and microwavecomponents. L-3 also supports a variety of Homeland Securityinitiatives with products and services. Its customers include theDepartment of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, selectedU.S. Government intelligence agencies and aerospace primecontractors. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Dec. 2, 2005,Moody's Investors Service affirmed the debt ratings of L-3Communications Holdings, Inc., Corporate Family Rating of Ba2,and has changed L-3 Communications Corporation's Speculative GradeLiquidity Rating to SGL-1 from SGL-2.LARRY'S MARKETS: Gets Interim Nod on Winterbauer as Labor Counsel-----------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Washingtongave its interim approval for Larry's Markets, Inc., to employWinterbauer & Diamond P.L.L.C. as its special labor and employmentcounsel.Winterbauer & Diamond is expected to provide employment and laboradvice, including matters involving collective bargainingagreements and the Worker Adjustment and Retraining NotificationAct under Sections 2101 of Title 29 of the U.S. Code.Steven H. Winterbauer, Esq., a member at Winterbauer & Diamond,tells the Court that he will bill $285 per hour for thisengagement. Mr. Winterbauer discloses that the firm's otherprofessionals and support personnel bill between $105 to $190 perhour.Mr. Winterbauer assures the Court that his firm is disinterestedas that term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Mr. Winterbauer can be reached at: Steven H. Winterbauer, Esq. Winterbauer & Diamond P.L.L.C. 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1910 Seattle, WA 98101 Tel: (206) 676-8440 Fax: (206) 676-8441Headquartered in Kirklan, Washington, Larry's Markets, Inc. --http://www.larrysmarkets.com/-- operates several supermarkets and department stores in the U.S. Northwest. The company filed forchapter 11 protection on May 7, 2006 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. Case No.06-11378). Armand J. Kornfeld, Esq., at Bush Strout & Kornfeld,represents the Debtor. The Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors has selected Marc L. Barreca, Esq., and Michael J.Gearin, Esq., at Preston Gates & Ellis LLP, to represent it in theDebtor's case. When the Debtor filed for protection from itscreditors, it listed total assets of $12,574,695 and total debtsof $21,489,800.LEVITZ HOME: Landlords Want to Collect Unpaid Rents---------------------------------------------------MS Elmhurst, LLC, CS Elmhurst, LLC, MS Paramus, LLC, CLSDiversified, LLC, Sea Plan, LLC and J.J.J.D. Associates, L.L.C.-- the Landlords -- and Leasehold Agency Associates, Inc., asagent for the Landlords, ask the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theSouthern District of New York to compel Levitz Home Furnishings,Inc., its debtor affiliates and PLVTZ, LLC, to: (a) pay postpetition rent; and (b) pay or bond obligations, including attorney's fees and costs, relating to mechanic liens, or cause the satisfaction, discharge and release of mechanic liens filed in respect of certain nonresidential real property leases with Seaman Furniture Company, Inc.According to Remy J. Ferrario, Esq., at Golub & Golub, LLP, inNew York, the Debtors or the Purchasers failed to paypostpetition rent and other charges under four unexpirednon-residential real property leases, and to bond, pay orsatisfy, discharge and extinguish mechanic liens filed againstpremises under two of those leases between Seaman and theLandlords.The Seaman Leases relate to premises located at: (1) 86-08 Queens Boulevard, Elmhurst, New York (two mechanic liens have been filed against the Elmhurst Premises; (2) 55 Route No. 4, Paramus, New Jersey; (3) Route 110 and Schmidt Boulevard, Farmingdale, New York (three mechanic liens have been filed against the Farmingdale Premises); and (4) the Nesconset-Port Jefferson Highway, Smithtown, New York.Mr. Ferrario reminds the Court that, on January 20, 2006, theSmithtown Lease has been designated by the Purchasers as a\"Dropout Lease.\" The Purchasers' obligation to pay expenses forthe Dropout Property ceased on January 31, 2006.On January 25, 2006, the Debtors filed a notice rejecting theSmithtown Lease.The Landlords seek immediate payment of: (a) $74,067 for the Elmhurst Lease; (b) $81,742 for the Farmingdale Lease; (c) $41,649 for the Paramus Lease; and (d) $41,170 for the Smithtown Lease.The mechanic's liens asserted under the Farmingdale Lease total$426,369; and $22,675 as to the Elmhurst Lease. PLVTZ ObjectsPLVTZ, LLC, as purchasers of substantially all of the Debtors'assets, tells the Court that the Prepetition Rent Claims are notimmediately due and payable because the Prepetition Rent Claimsand the Leases have not been assumed.Under the Asset Purchase Agreement, PLVTZ does not have anyobligation to pay any amounts accruing before the Petition Dateunless they are part of a cure payment. With respect to theSmithtown Lease, it is a prepetition unsecured claim because theDebtors rejected it, PLVTZ adds.D.J. Baker, Esq., at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, inNew York, relates that the PLVTZ does not dispute that it isobligated to pay postpetition October 2005 rent in respect of anystores that were not Excluded Stores as of the Closing Date,however, it has not been able to obtain the Landlords'calculation of the Stub Period Rent Claim or information uponwhich to verify the calculation.Mr. Baker points out that there is no present obligation for theDebtors and PLVTZ to pay the claims for the Elmhurst, Paramus,and Farmingdale Premises. It would be premature, Mr. Bakerasserts, to allow claims for stub rent as an administrativeexpense and fulfill obligations for postpetition, pre-Closingamounts.If the Elmhurst, the Farmingdale, and the Paramus Leases wereultimately rejected, any claims for postpetition real estatetaxes, CAM, insurance or other obligations would be evaluated andpaid where appropriate upon rejection.Furthermore, there is no present obligation for the Debtors andPLVTZ to pay or otherwise satisfy the mechanic's liens filedagainst the Elmhurst and Farmingdale Premises, Mr. Baker says.Accordingly, PLVTZ asks the Court to reject the Landlords'request. About Levitz HomeHeadquartered in Woodbury, New York, Levitz Home Furnishings, Inc.-- http://www.levitz.com/-- is a leading specialty retailer of furniture in the United States with 121 locations in majormetropolitan areas principally the Northeast and on the West Coastof the United States. The Company and its 12 affiliates filed forchapter 11 protection on Oct. 11, 2005 (Bank. S.D.N.Y. Lead CaseNo. 05-45189). David G. Heiman, Esq., and Richard Engman, Esq.,at Jones Day, represent the Debtors in their restructuringefforts. When the Debtors filed for protection from theircreditors, they reported $245 million in assets and $456 millionin debts. Jay R. Indyke, Esq., at Kronish Lieb Weiner & HellmanLLP represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.Levitz sold substantially all of its assets to Prentice Capital onDec. 19, 2005. (Levitz Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 13 BankruptcyCreditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)LEVITZ HOME: Court Grants Lease Assumption and Assignment Plea--------------------------------------------------------------As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 4, 2006,Levitz Home Furnishings, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates soughtauthority from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern Districtof New York to assume and assign these leases to PLVTZ, LLC: Store# Address Landlord Cure Amount ------ ------- -------- ----------- 10302 Brooklyn, J.W. Mays, Inc. $0 New York 30301 Rosemead, Glendon Way Associates, $30,118 California c/o Primestor Development 30307 Hawthorne, Primstor Development, $12,567 California Inc., c/o Sherwood Village, LLC 30507 Murrieta, Village Walk Retail, $0 California L.P., c/o Aurthur Pearlman Corporation 30701 Tigard, Oregon Krausz Enterprises & $0 Krausz Puente, LLC 40603 Las Vegas, Nevso, L.L.C. $0 Nevada 40506 Tempe, Arizona Commercial Net Lease $46,301 Realty, Inc. 10102 Holbrook, Sun Lakes Plaza $32,415 New York Associates 10304 Brooklym, Richard Sachs Interiors, $107,979 New York Inc., c/o A.J. Richard & Sons, Inc. 10903 Valley Stream, Green Acers Mall, L.L.C. $75,211 New York 20502 Bronx, Bay Plaza Community $111,807 New York Center, LLC, c/o Prestige Properties & Development Co. 40401 Concord, R&B Heritage Investors, $120,131 California LP, and Marina Square Partners, LP, c/o Reynolds & Brown 30401 Anaheim, Wohl/Anaheim LLC, c/o $15,475 California Wohl Investment Company 30101 Ontario, Ontario Home Partners, $49,320 California Ltd. 30302 Cerritos, Cerritos Best Plaza, $116,493 California c/o Barco Real Estate Management 30204 San Dimas, R&W San Dimas, LLC $24,499 California 30206 Newhall, Glendon Way Associates & $57,177 California PETsMART, Inc. 30402 Huntington Freeway Industrial Park $90,795 Beach, Huntley Associates California 40602 Las Vegas, Constantino Noval Nevada $148,908 Nevada LLC, c/o American Management Company 40502 Mesa, Arizona Krausz Puente, LLC, c/o $40,641 The Krausz Companies, Inc.Judge Lifland grants the Debtors' request as it relates to theleases for: (a) Store Nos. 10302, 30301, 30307, 30701, 40603, 10102, 20502, 30401, 30101, 30302, 30204, 30206 and 30402; (b) Store No. 30507, to the extent that, among other things, the assumption and assignment of the Lease will be of the entire Lease, including the First Amendment and any other amendments; and (c) Store No. 10304, to the extent that, among other things: * The Debtors or PLVTZ will be responsible for the $165,000 cure amount; and * PLVTZ will place $130,000 in a separate segregated account to cover certain cure amounts claimed by Richard Sachs for Store No. 10304 as part of the appropriate cure amount, and which PLVTZ disputes; and * The Objection to Store No. 10304 is resolved in part with respect to the Cure Payment as provided, which payment will be final and non-recoverable, and the Objection is otherwise reserved with regard to the Disputed Cure Claim. Counsel for PLVTZ, with assistance from the Debtors, if required, will identify all disputed issues with regard to the Disputed Cure Claim by May 11, 2006, and provide copies of all of the documentation upon which PLVTZ and the Debtors rely in support of their position concerning the Disputed Cure Claim as soon as practicable thereafter but in no event later than May 18, 2006. In the event that Richard Sachs and PLVTZ cannot reach a consensual resolution with respect to the Disputed Cure Claim, a hearing to determine the proper amount, if any, that will be paid as the additional Cure Amount will be held.The Court will conduct a hearing, if necessary, on the Debtors'request to assume and assign the Leases with respect to StoreNos. 40506, 10903 and 40401, as well as the Disputed Cure Claim,at a later date. More Responses(a) Freeway Industrial Park, et al.Five landlords ask the Court to condition the Debtors' proposedassumption and assignment to PLVTZ, LLC, of their Leases uponpayment of the proper cure amounts that are due and owing.The objecting parties are: Debtors' Landlords' Asserted AssertedStore No. Objecting Party Cure Amount Cure Amount--------- --------------- ----------- ----------- 30402 Freeway Industrial Park $90,795 $98,570 10903 Vornado Realty Trust, as $75,211 $145,872 agent of Green Acres Mall, LLC 30204 R&W San Dimas, LLC $24,499 $37,054 40401 Macy's Department Stores, $120,131 $121,810 Inc., formerly known as Macy's West, Inc. 10304 Richard Sachs Interiors, $107,979 $293,329 Inc.The Landlords assert outstanding defaults with respect to theirLeases, consisting of: * outstanding rent payments; * real estate taxes and adjustments; * common area maintenance charges; * due year-end adjustments; and * other potential unknown indemnification claims.Additionally, the Landlords reserve their right to amend,supplement or modify their asserted Cure Amounts for any reason,including attorneys' fees.Moreover, some of the Landlords ask the Court not to permit theDebtors to assign their Leases to PLVTZ unless PLVTZ agrees andis required to comply with all of the terms of their Leases,including maintenance obligations.Racanelli Construction Company, Inc., was retained by the Debtorsto provide extensive general contracting services to a number ofthe Debtors' store locations in the tri-state area.Racanelli asserts it is owed not less than: (1) $11,883 for Store No. 10302; (2) $1,055 for Store No. 20502; and (3) $76,467 for Store No. 10903.Racanelli thus objects to the proposed assumption and assignmentof the Store Leases to the extent that it does not contemplate acure that satisfies the amounts due and owing to Racanelli inconnection with the Leases. Racanelli asserts that the Debtors'proposed cure is unsatisfactory.Accordingly, Racanelli asks the Court to condition the approvalof the Debtors' request upon payment of the proper amounts due toRacanelli, or otherwise resolving Racanelli's liens and claims.(b) Village WalkVillage Walk Retail, L.P., and Levitz Furniture, LLC, are partiesto a Reverse Build to Suit Lease dated as of December 31, 2004,covering premises located at Murrieta, California and designatedas Store No. 30507.After the Petition Date, the parties entered into a FirstAmendment to the Original Lease with the knowledge and consent ofthe proposed assignee, PLVTZ, LLC.Village Walk does not oppose the assumption and assignment of itsLease. Village Walk simply seeks confirmation from the Debtorand PLVTZ if the Debtor will assume and assign the entire Lease,including the First Amendment, or only the Original Lease.(c) R&B Heritage and Marina SquareR&B Heritage Investors, L.P., and Marina Square Partners, L.P.,the lessors to Macy's West, Inc., ask the Court to deny theproposed assumption and assignment of their lease with respect toStore No. 40401 located at Concord, California, because: (a) The Lease will terminate by its own terms on July 31, 2006, and Levitz Furniture Corporation failed to effectively exercise any option to extend the Lease beyond that date; (b) The Debtors have not and cannot cure the defaults under the Lease; (c) PLVTZ has not and cannot provide adequate assurances of future performance to the Landlord; and (d) The Debtors have failed to identify a proposed use of the Premises that is compatible with the shopping center environment. About Levitz HomeHeadquartered in Woodbury, New York, Levitz Home Furnishings, Inc.-- http://www.levitz.com/-- is a leading specialty retailer of furniture in the United States with 121 locations in majormetropolitan areas principally the Northeast and on the West Coastof the United States. The Company and its 12 affiliates filed forchapter 11 protection on Oct. 11, 2005 (Bank. S.D.N.Y. Lead CaseNo. 05-45189). David G. Heiman, Esq., and Richard Engman, Esq.,at Jones Day, represent the Debtors in their restructuringefforts. When the Debtors filed for protection from theircreditors, they reported $245 million in assets and $456 millionin debts. Jay R. Indyke, Esq., at Kronish Lieb Weiner & HellmanLLP represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.Levitz sold substantially all of its assets to Prentice Capital onDec. 19, 2005. (Levitz Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 13 BankruptcyCreditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)LOVESAC CORP: Gets Court Okay to Hire Squire Sanders as Counsel---------------------------------------------------------------The LoveSac Corporation and its debtor-affiliates obtainedpermission from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District ofDelaware to employ Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP as theirbankruptcy counsel.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Feb. 3, 2006,Squire Sanders will: (a) advise the Debtors with respect to their power and duties as debtors-in-possession in the continued management and operation of their businesses and property; (b) attend meetings and negotiate with representatives of creditors and other parties-in-interest and advise and consult on the conduct of the Debtors' bankruptcy cases, including all of the legal and administrative requirements of operating in chapter 11; (c) assist the Debtors with the preparation of their Schedules of Assets and Liabilities and Statements of Financial Affairs; (d) advise the Debtors in connection with any sales of assets or business combinations, including the negotiation of asset, stock, purchase, merger or joint venture agreements, formulate and implement appropriate procedures with respect to the closing of any of those transactions, and counseling the Debtors in connection with those transactions; (e) advise the Debtors in connection with any postpetition financing and cash collateral arrangements and negotiate and draft documents relating to them, provide advice and counsel with respect to prepetition financing arrangements, and negotiate and draft documents relating to them; (f) advise the Debtors on matters relating to the evaluation of the assumption, rejection or assignment of unexpired leases and executory contracts; (g) advise the Debtors with respect to legal issues arising in or relating to the Debtors' ordinary course of business, including attendance at senior management meetings, meetings with the Debtors' financial and turnaround advisors and meetings of the board of directors; (h) take all necessary action to protect and preserve the Debtors' estates, including the prosecution of actions on their behalf, the defense of any actions commenced against them, negotiations concerning all litigation in which the Debtors are involved and objecting to claims filed against the Debtors' estates; (i) prepare, on the Debtors' behalf, all motions, applications, answers, orders, reports and papers necessary to the administration of the estates; (j) negotiate and prepare, on the Debtors' behalf, a plan or plans of reorganization, disclosure statement and all related agreements and documents and taking any necessary action on behalf of the Debtors to obtain confirmation of those plan or plans; (k) attend meetings with third parties and participating in negotiations with respect to the above matters; (l) appear before the Court, any appellate courts and the United States Trustee and protecting the interests of the Debtors' estates before those court and the United States Trustee; (m) perform all other necessary legal services and provide all other necessary legal advice to the Debtors in connection with their bankruptcy cases; and (n) perform all other necessary legal services and provide all other necessary legal as requested by the Debtors including but not limited to corporate finance, franchising, litigation, regulatory, labor, tax, corporate and intellectual property matters.Stephen D. Lerner, Esq., a partner at Squire, Sanders & DempseyLLP, disclosed that the Firm received a $100,000 retainer. TheFirm's professionals bill: Designation Hourly Rate ----------- ----------- Partners $295 to $790 Associates and Of Counsel $145 to $630 Paralegals and Legal Assistants $50 to $240Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, The LoveSac Corporation --http://www.lovesac.com/-- operates and franchises retail stores selling beanbags furniture. The LoveSac Corp. and threeaffiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on Jan. 30, 2006(Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 06-10080). Anthony M. Saccullo, Esq.,and Charlene D. Davis, Esq., at The Bayard Firm and P. CaseyCoston, Esq., at Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP represent theDebtors in their restructuring efforts. Michael W. Yurkewicz,Esq., at Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg & Ellers represents theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they estimated assets anddebts between $10 million to $50 million.LOVESAC CORP: Governmental Units Can File Claims Until July 31-------------------------------------------------------------- Governmental units have until July 31, 2006 to file their proofsof claim in The LoveSac Corporation and its debtor-affiliates'chapter 11 cases.Governmental unit proofs of claim must be sent either by mail orcourier on or before 4:00 pm, Pacific time, to: The LoveSac Corporation Claims Processing c/o Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC 12910 Culver Boulevard, Suite I Los Angeles, CA 90066These claims were expected filed as of May 22, 2006: 1. unsecured claims; 2. litigation claims; 3. worker's compensation claims; and 4. administrative agency claims.Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, The LoveSac Corporation --http://www.lovesac.com/-- operates and franchises retail stores selling beanbags furniture. The LoveSac Corp. and threeaffiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on Jan. 30, 2006(Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 06-10080). Anthony M. Saccullo, Esq.,and Charlene D. Davis, Esq., at The Bayard Firm and P. CaseyCoston, Esq., at Squire, Sanders & Dempsey LLP represent theDebtors in their restructuring efforts. Michael W. Yurkewicz,Esq., at Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg & Ellers represents theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filedfor protection from their creditors, they estimated assets anddebts between $10 million to $50 million.MIAD SYSTEMS: Amends Annual 2005 Report & Two 2006 Fiscal Quarters------------------------------------------------------------------MIAD Systems Ltd. filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on May 26, 2006, its amended financial statements for: -- the year ended Sept. 30, 2005; -- the first quarter ended Dec. 31, 2005; and -- the second quarter ended March 31, 2006.The company's Statement of Operations showed: For the period ended ---------------------------------- Year Quarter Quarter 09/30/05 12/31/05 03/31/06 ---------- ---------- ----------Revenue $8,321,083 $1,631,180 $1,296,470Net Income (Loss) $28,492 ($778,827) ($910,701)The company's Balance Sheet showed: For the period ended ---------------------------------- Year Quarter Quarter 09/30/05 12/31/05 03/31/06 ---------- ---------- ----------Current Assets $1,374,212 $1,266,200 $861,177Total Assets $1,537,169 $1,422,976 $1,016,985CurrentLiabilities $1,695,319 $1,611,504 $1,337,387TotalLiabilities $1,695,319 $1,611,504 $1,337,387Stockholders'Deficit $158,150 ($188,528) ($320,402)Full-text copies of the company's financial statements areavailable for free at: Year Ended Sept. 30, 2005 http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a03 First quarter ended Dec. 31, 2005 http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a04 Second quarter ended March 31, 2006 http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a05Markham, Ontario-based MIAD Systems Ltd. -- http://www.miad.com/-- is an established full-line supplier of business computersystems as well as a provider of computer maintenance,installation and networking services. MIAD does not sell toindividuals but provides these goods and services to its majorclients who are primarily engaged in the corporate, institutional,municipal, utilities and education fields, typically as part oftheir computer networks.MIRANT CORP: Proposes to Acquire NRG Energy for $8 Billion----------------------------------------------------------Mirant Corporation made a proposal to acquire NRG Energy, Inc. ata premium of approximately 33% to NRG's share price as of Tuesday,May 30, 2006. The proposal would be immediately accretive to thepro forma free cash flow per share of Mirant. Mirant received afinancing commitment from JPMorgan of approximately $11.5 billionfor the transaction.NRG flatly rejected the proposal without engaging in anydiscussions with Mirant. Mirant continues to believe that theproposal creates significant value for the owners of bothcompanies and has decided to make its proposal public in a letterto NRG's board of directors.Edward R. Muller, Mirant's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,stated in the letter that:\"We were disappointed that you would reject so quickly on behalfof your shareholders, without any discussion with us, ouracquisition proposal of May 10, 2006, which provides yourshareholders a substantial premium to their share price and theopportunity to participate in the additional value creation weexpect from the combined company. We think that it is importantfor your shareholders to be informed of such a compellingopportunity, and, therefore, we are simultaneously releasing thisletter to the public.\"In the transaction we proposed, your shareholders would receive,at their election, $57.50 per share in cash or Mirant Corporationcommon stock at an exchange ratio of 2.25 Mirant shares for eachshare of NRG common stock, based upon our understanding that youhave 137.5 million fully diluted shares outstanding. Yourshareholders' elections to receive the total of approximately$3.9 billion in cash (representing 50% of the total consideration)or Mirant common stock would be subject to proration to preservethe 50/50 cash/stock mix in the deal.\"This transaction would provide a blended value of approximately$57.16 per share of NRG common stock and would represent asubstantial premium of approximately 33% to NRG's share price,based on the closing prices of Mirant and NRG on Tuesday, May 30,2006. In addition, your shareholders would receive a premium ofapproximately 33% to your one-year average trading price andapproximately 55% to your two-year average trading price.\"We think that a combination of Mirant and NRG would create anenterprise with significant opportunities for expense andoperational synergies and a national footprint that is withoutparallel. The combination would generate a number of specific andcompelling benefits. Our best estimate of the annual cost savingsfrom the reduction of overlapping functions is $150 million (basedon publicly available information), in addition to significantopportunities for cost savings from the procurement and use offuel and in the application of emissions credits. The combinationalso would diversify the risks associated with the assets andoperations of both companies. In addition, the combination wouldcreate the largest independent power company in the United Stateswith a strong presence in four key regions (Texas, Mid- Atlantic,Northeast and California). The combined company would have over43,000 megawatts globally, with over 37,500 megawatts in theUnited States. Approximately 32% of its domestic capacity wouldbe low-cost, baseload generating capacity. Finally, thecombination would enhance liquidity and value for the shareholdersof both companies. We estimate that the combined company wouldhave adjusted EBITDA for 2007 in excess of $3 billion. Thetransaction would be immediately accretive to Mirant's pro formafree cash flow per share. In short, we think that the combinedcompany would deliver superior returns to our combined shareholderbase, with benefits flowing to our respective customers, employeesand other constituencies as well.\"Mirant emerged from Chapter 11 on January 3, 2006, with whatmost observers characterize as the strongest balance sheet inthe industry. Since Jan. 3, 2006, a total of approximately275 million of our shares have traded, representing approximately92% of our total outstanding shares. Our hedging strategy hasbeen effective in reducing risk while improving our earningsprofile. We currently expect that cash flows from operationsthrough 2011 will be sufficient to fund our forecasted capitalexpenditures, including those for required environmental controls.Finally, we have a new management team with extensive experiencein the industry.\"We think that now is the right time to pursue a combination ofour companies, and we are committed to doing so on an expeditedbasis. Our Board of Directors has approved our proposal, and weare prepared to begin negotiations of the terms of our proposalwith you immediately and to enter into a definitive mergeragreement and complete the transaction as soon as possible. Wehave received a financing commitment from JPMorgan ofapproximately $11.5 billion which, when combined with ouravailable cash, will: * fund the cash portion of the purchase consideration for your common and, if necessary, preferred stock; * refinance your senior credit facilities; and * fund the purchase of your 7.250% Senior Notes and 7.375% Senior Notes pursuant to a change of control offer at a price equal to 101% of the aggregate principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest.\"The indebtedness of our subsidiaries, including Mirant AmericasGeneration, LLC and Mirant North America, LLC, would remain inplace. We expect that due diligence can be completed quickly. Inaddition, given the complementary geographies of our respectiveoperations, we expect that all regulatory approvals will beobtained expeditiously. With your cooperation, we think that wecan close the transaction in 2006.\"We expect your shareholders to respond enthusiastically to thistransaction: current shareholders who wish to exit will have theopportunity to do so at an attractive premium; those shareholderswho choose to continue as investors in the combined company willreceive both an attractive premium and have the opportunity toparticipate in the additional value creation we expect from thecombination. We believe ardently in the wisdom and strategicvalue of this transaction and the benefits it offers to ourcombined shareholders and stakeholders. This matter has thehighest priority for us.\" About NRG EnergyHeadquartered in Princeton, New Jersey, NRG Energy, Inc. -- http://www.nrgenergy.com/-- currently owns and operates a diverse portfolio of power-generating facilities, primarily in theNortheast, South Central and Western regions of the United States.Its operations include baseload, intermediate, peaking, andcogeneration facilities, thermal energy production and energyresource recovery facilities. NRG also has ownership interests ingenerating facilities in Australia and Germany. About MirantHeadquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, Mirant Corporation --http://www.mirant.com/-- is a competitive energy company that produces and sells electricity in North America, the Caribbean,and the Philippines. Mirant owns or leases more than 18,000megawatts of electric generating capacity globally. MirantCorporation filed for chapter 11 protection on July 14, 2003(Bankr. N.D. Tex. 03-46590), and emerged under the terms of aconfirmed Second Amended Plan on Jan. 3, 2006. Thomas E.Lauria, Esq., at White & Case LLP, represented the Debtors intheir successful restructuring. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they listed $20,574,000,000 inassets and $11,401,000,000 in debts.At Dec. 2, 2005, Moody's Investors Service assigned a B1 long-termcorporate family rating to Mirant Corp.MIRANT CORP: Acquisition Proposal Undervalues NRG Energy--------------------------------------------------------NRG Energy, Inc. confirmed, on May 30, 2006, that it has receivedan unsolicited proposal from Mirant Corporation regarding apotential combination in letters dated May 10 and 30, 2006.Consistent with its fiduciary duties and in consultation with itsfinancial advisor and legal counsel, NRG's Board of Directorsreviewed the Mirant proposal and deemed it not in the bestinterests of NRG shareholders. NRG shareholders do not need totake any action at this time.Citigroup is serving as financial advisor to NRG, and Skadden,Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP is legal counsel.On May 23, 2006, NRG sent a response letter to Edward R. Muller,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Mirant Corporation and theMirant Board of Directors.The letter from Howard Cosgrove, NRG's Chairman of the Board, andDavid Crane, NRG's President and Chief Executive Officer, statedthat:\"The Board of Directors of NRG Energy, Inc., with the assistanceof its financial and legal advisors, has reviewed and thoroughlyconsidered your May 10, 2006 letter. Based upon this review theBoard has unanimously rejected your proposal because it is not inthe best interests of NRG shareholders. The NRG Board hasspecifically authorized this response.\"As discussed below, the Board has found your proposal deficientin at least three key respects: * it significantly undervalues NRG; * our concerns about Mirant's value and your stock's relative lack of liquidity and trading history makes Mirant's stock an unacceptable currency; and, * finally, having taken into account trends and developments in the wholesale power generation sector, we do not believe this is the appropriate time to engage in a sale process.\"Having spent considerable time analyzing Mirant, its assets andprospects -- both during the three years you spent in bankruptcyand the four months since you emerged -- we have concluded thatMirant is a company and stock with flat earnings, little to nogrowth opportunity beyond 2007, substantial and imminentenvironmental capital expenditures, and significant EBITDAexposure to developing country risk. Additionally, with only afour-month trading history and an average daily trading volume of2.7 million shares during those four months, we believe thatMirant's stock lacks a sufficient track record and liquidity forus to recommend to our shareholders that they accept over 150million Mirant shares as you propose. These factors far outweighany synergistic benefits that might come from a combination of thetwo companies.\"For these reasons, NRG's Board and management strongly believethat our shareholders would be poorly served by being exposed toMirant's challenges through ownership of Mirant equity on theterms set forth in your proposal.On the question of timing, we believe our cyclical industry hasjust begun to emerge out of a multi-year trough and, over the nextcouple of years, we will experience continued robust commodityprices, supply shortfalls in our core regions, spark spreadrecovery and a rationalization of the utility industry in such away that the intrinsic value of NRG (and the value of NRG as apotential acquisition candidate) will rise rapidly. And we areconfident that we will be able to convert the rise in intrinsicvalue of NRG into increased market value. Over the past 24months, NRG's stock has appreciated 120% as the market hasrecognized the value of our asset mix, the soundness of ourstrategy and our track record in its implementation, including: * a diverse multi-regional domestic portfolio of 22,848 MW; * a substantial EBITDA growth rate past 2007 from hedges placed at rising prices; * a thriving brownfield development program across all regions; and * a history of returning capital to shareholders through two substantial share buybacks in the first 18 months of our existence.\"We are confident that our stock is poised for furtherappreciation as we capitalize on the positive industry trends andas the market comes to recognize our embedded growth potentialparticularly post-2007. In this regard, we note that the premiumreflected in your proposal is far less than the annual compoundaverage growth rate of NRG's share price appreciation.\"To clarify one point, your letter references past meetingsbetween you and our Chief Executive Officer, David Crane, on thetopic of combining NRG and Mirant. Our Company's strategicinterest in Mirant predates your tenure there and is well known toanyone who has read transcripts of your bankruptcy hearings. WhenMr. Crane discussed a combination of the two companies with youlast November, it was in the context of NRG acquiring Mirant,since at that time Mirant's stock was neither listed nor activelytraded. Once your company finally emerged from bankruptcy inJanuary 2006, our Board specifically reviewed the possibleacquisition of Mirant by NRG. We decided not to do so on thegrounds that at $25 per share Mirant's stock was overvalued, andwe were not willing to risk NRG's reputation for financialdiscipline on an overpriced bid for Mirant. When you approachedMr. Crane in March to propose a \"no premium\" acquisition of NRG byMirant, Mr. Crane advised you that such a transaction (at theprice for NRG's shares implied by your proposal) was not worthpursuing further given that it would be massively dilutive to NRGshareholders -- a point of view which neither you nor GoldmanSachs has ever attempted to refute.\"As you know, NRG believes that industry consolidation isinevitable, and we expect to participate -- either as a buyer or aseller. You should also know that we would only pursuetransactions that create unquestionable value for ourstockholders. Your proposal is simply the wrong deal at the wrongtime.\" About NRG EnergyHeadquartered in Princeton, New Jersey, NRG Energy, Inc. -- http://www.nrgenergy.com/-- currently owns and operates a diverse portfolio of power-generating facilities, primarily in theNortheast, South Central and Western regions of the United States.Its operations include baseload, intermediate, peaking, andcogeneration facilities, thermal energy production and energyresource recovery facilities. NRG also has ownership interests ingenerating facilities in Australia and Germany. About MirantHeadquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, Mirant Corporation --http://www.mirant.com/-- is a competitive energy company that produces and sells electricity in North America, the Caribbean,and the Philippines. Mirant owns or leases more than 18,000megawatts of electric generating capacity globally. MirantCorporation filed for chapter 11 protection on July 14, 2003(Bankr. N.D. Tex. 03-46590), and emerged under the terms of aconfirmed Second Amended Plan on Jan. 3, 2006. Thomas E.Lauria, Esq., at White & Case LLP, represented the Debtors intheir successful restructuring. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they listed $20,574,000,000 inassets and $11,401,000,000 in debts.At Dec. 2, 2005, Moody's Investors Service assigned a B1 long-termcorporate family rating to Mirant Corp.NCP MARKETING: Files Plan & Disclosure Statement in Nevada---------------------------------------------------------- N.C.P. Marketing Group, Inc., delivered to the U.S. BankruptcyCourt for the District of Nevada a disclosure statement explainingits plan of reorganization.Under the Plan, Administrative and Priority Tax Claims will bepaid in full in cash.Holders of Century Secured Claim will receive a plan note interestwhich will entitle Century Incorporated to a priority payment fromthe Plan Trust until the Century Secured Claim is paid in full.Holders of General Unsecured Priority Claims will also receiveplan note interests, which will entitle them to payment pursuantto a Plan Trust Agreement.Holders of Non-Tax Priority Claims will receive cash equal to theallowed amount of their claim while holders of Other SecuredClaims will receive payment pursuant to a Plan Trust Agreement.Holders of Qualified Equity Interests will not receive anydistribution under the Plan unless and until all claims in seniorclasses have been paid in full. Intercompany claims whichconsists General Unsecured Claims of the Debtors' affiliates willreceive nothing under the PlanHeadquartered in North West Canton, Ohio, N.C.P. Marketing Group,Inc. is an infomercial producer and global marketer of theplatinum award-winning original Billy Blanks' Tae-Bo VideoLibrary. The Debtor filed for chapter 11 protection onApril 13, 2004 (Bankr. Nev. Case No. 04-51071). Jeffrey Baddeley,Esq., at Spangenberg Shibley & Liber LLP and Jennifer A. Smith,Esq., at Lionel Sawyer & Collins represent the Debtor in itsrestructuring efforts. No Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors has been appointed in this case. When the Debtor filedfor protection from its creditors, it estimated assets and debtsbetween $10 million to $50 million.NATIONAL MENTOR: To Buy Back $150 Mil. of 9-5/8% Sr. Sub. Notes---------------------------------------------------------------National Mentor, Inc., commenced a cash tender offer and consentsolicitation for any and all outstanding $150,000,000 aggregateprincipal amount of its 9-5/8% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2012(CUSIP No. 63688XAB0). This tender offer and consent solicitationis subject to the terms and conditions set forth in Offer toPurchase and Consent Solicitation Statement dated May 25, 2006.This offer to purchase the Notes is part of the Company'srefinancing in connection with its pending merger with anaffiliate of Vestar Capital Partners V, L.P. The merger iscurrently expected to close on June 29, 2006.The tender offer is scheduled to expire at 8:00 a.m., New YorkCity time, on June 29, 2006, unless extended. The consentsolicitation is scheduled to expire at 5:00 p.m., New York Citytime, on June 12, 2006, unless extended.The total consideration for each $1,000 principal amount of Notesvalidly tendered and accepted for payment and consents validlydelivered on or prior to the Consent Date will be equal to thepresent value of $1,048.13 and all future interest payments on theNotes to Dec. 1, 2008, minus accrued and unpaid interest from thelast date on which interest has been paid, up to, but notincluding, the settlement date. The present value will bedetermined using a yield equal to the bid price on the 3.375% U.S.Treasury Note due Dec. 15, 2008 at 2:00 p.m., New York City time,on June 12, 2006, plus a fixed spread of 50 basis points. Thetotal consideration for each Note tendered includes a consentpayment of $30.00 per $1,000 principal amount of Notes to holderswho validly tender their Notes and deliver their consents prior to5:00 p.m. on the Consent Date.Holders who tender their Notes after the Consent Date will notreceive the consent payment. Payment for all Notes validlytendered in the tender offer, including the consent payment forconsents validly delivered on or prior to the Consent Date, willbe made promptly after expiration of the tender offer for theNotes.In conjunction with the tender offer, the Company is solicitingthe consents of the holders of the Notes to eliminatesubstantially all of the restrictive covenants and certain eventsof default and related provisions in the indenture under which theNotes were issued. Holders who tender their Notes must consent tothe proposed amendments.The tender offer and consent solicitation is subject to thesatisfaction of certain conditions, including (1) the merger of NMH MergerSub, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of NMH Investments, LLC, an affiliate of Vestar Capital Partners V, L.P., with and into National Mentor Holdings, Inc., the parent company of the Company; (2) the Company having repaid its obligations under its existing senior secured credit facilities pursuant to a refinancing of those facilities; (3) the Company having received, on or prior to the Consent Date, consents, which have not been revoked in respect of at least a majority in principal amount of the Notes and a supplemental indenture having been signed and delivered in respect of the proposed amendments; and (4) certain other customary conditions.The Company may waive some or all of these conditions in its solediscretion and may amend, extend or terminate the tender offer andconsent solicitation in its sole discretion.The complete terms and conditions of the tender offer and consentsolicitation are described in the Offer to Purchase and ConsentSolicitation Statement dated May 25, 2006, copies of which may beobtained from the information agent for the tender offer andconsent solicitation: MacKenzie Partners, Inc. Telephone (212) 929-5500 (collect) U.S. Toll Free (800) 322-2885The Company has engaged J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. to act asdealer manager and solicitation agent in connection with thetender offer and consent solicitation. Questions regarding thetender offer and consent solicitation may be directed to: J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. Telephone (212) 270-9769The Depositary for the tender offer and consent solicitation andcan be contacted at: U.S. Bank National Association Telephone (800) 934-6802 About the CompanyHeadquartered in Boston, Massachusetts, National MENTOR, Inc. -- http://www.thementornetowrk.com/-- is a leading provider of home and community-based services for individuals with mentalretardation and other developmental disabilities, at-risk youthand persons with acquired brain injury. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 3, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its ratings onBoston, Massachusetts-based special-needs services providerNational Mentor Inc., including the 'B+' corporate credit rating,on CreditWatch with negative implications (indicating that theratings could be lowered or affirmed upon further review). TheCreditWatch placement follows National Mentor's announcement thatmanagement, in partnership with Vestar Capital Partners, willacquire the company.NES RENTALS: Accepts $850MM Purchase Offer from Diamond Castle--------------------------------------------------------------NES Rentals Holdings, Inc., concluded its strategic review processby signing a definitive agreement to be acquired by affiliates ofDiamond Castle Holdings, LLC, a New York-based private equityfirm, in a transaction valued at approximately $850 million,including the assumption of certain liabilities.Under the terms of the agreement, Diamond Castle will acquireall of the outstanding common stock of NES Rentals for $18.75per share in cash. The purchase price per share represents a42% premium to the Company's closing price per share of $13.25on Jan. 12, 2006, the day on which the Company reported it wouldexplore strategic alternatives.NES Rentals Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Andrew Studdertsaid the implementation of a series of operating and revenueinitiatives during the past two years has improved return oninvestment. \"After undergoing significant change in recent years,NES Rentals has emerged as a well-positioned and profitablebusiness,\" he said. \"The progress we have made allowed us to bein a position to consider options to unlock the value of ourCompany.\"As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Jan. 18, 2006, theCompany's Board of Directors retained Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. toassist in reviewing strategic alternatives. Mr. Studdert saidthis review included consideration of a variety of options,including the sale of the Company.\"As part of this effort, the Board undertook a wide-rangingauction process ultimately resulting in the decision that theoffer from Diamond Castle is in the best interests of the Companyand its shareholders. When completed, this deal will allow NESRentals to continue to meet and exceed the high standards we'veestablished for customer service, quality equipment and financialgrowth.\"Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. and Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin eachprovided fairness opinions on the transaction to the Board ofDirectors.Completion of the sale is expected within 60 days. It iscontingent upon customary closing conditions, including regulatoryapprovals, delivery of the committed financing, and the approvalof NES Rentals' stockholders. NES Rentals scheduled a specialmeeting of stockholders to vote on the proposed transaction thatwill be held on June 23, 2006.Mr. Studdert agreed to continue on in his capacity as ChiefExecutive Officer and Chairman of the Board following thecompletion of the transaction. Diamond Castle expects to retainNES Rentals' company name, management team and product lines.Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. acted as exclusive financial advisor toNES Rentals Holdings, Inc. Kirkland & Ellis LLP acted as legalcounsel to NES Rentals Holdings, Inc. Banc of America SecuritiesLLC acted as exclusive financial advisor to Diamond Castle.Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP acted as legal counsel to DiamondCastle. In addition, Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. is leadingthe syndicate to deliver the committed financing for theacquisition. About Diamond Castle HoldingsHeadquartered in New York City, Diamond Castle Holdings, LLC -- http://www.diamondcastleholdings.com/-- is a private equity investment firm founded in 2004 by Larry Schloss, the formerGlobal Head of CSFB Private Equity and Chairman of DLJ MerchantBanking Partners, and four former managing directors of DLJMerchant Banking. Diamond Castle has 22 employees located in NewYork and focuses on investments in the power, financial services,media and telecom, healthcare, and industrial sectors. About NES Rentals HoldingsHeadquartered in Chicago, Illinois, NES Rentals Holdings, Inc. -- http://www.nesrentals.com/-- is the fifth largest company in the $29 billion equipment rental industry. The company focuses onrenting specialty and general equipment to industrial andconstruction end-users. It rents more than 750 types of machineryand equipment, and distributes new equipment for nationallyrecognized original equipment manufacturers. NES Rentals alsosells used equipment as well as complementary parts, supplies andmerchandise, and provides repair and maintenance services to itscustomers. In addition to the rental business NES Rentals is thesecond largest supplier of traffic and safety services to theconstruction industry. The company is a leading competitor inmany of the geographic markets it reaches, from its approximately117 locations in 34 states. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Feb 24, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its ratings on equipmentrental company NES Rental Holdings Inc., including its 'B+'corporate credit rating, on CreditWatch with developingimplications.NEW ORLEANS: Chase Attempting to Arrange a $150 Million Loan------------------------------------------------------------At March 31, 2006, the City of New Orleans had 48.2 million in itsgeneral fund, down from $166 million a year ago. In the eight-month period following Hurricane Katrina's devastation of the BigEasy, annual revenues have fallen sharply. The City collected $22million in taxes in March 2006 -- about 22% of what it collectedin March 2005.A report prepared last month by the Bureau of GovernmentalResearch and the public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana,suggests that New Orleans should file for bankruptcy. That jointreport, entitled \"Municipal Bankruptcy in Perspective\" -- available at no charge at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?8d5-- shares a wealth of financial details, provides a brief overview offederal and state law on municipal bankruptcy, describes theadvantages and disadvantages of the option, and looks at thefinancial condition of selected local entities in three of thehardest hit parishes: Cameron, Orleans, and St. Bernard.Despite steps taken to date, the joint Report says, the City ofNew Orleans and the Orleans Parish School Board are teetering onthe edge of the cliff. The School Board is dealing with chroniccash flow problems, and the City is one month away from runningout of cash. With their tax bases in shambles, it is unclearwhether they will be able to meet the threefold challenge ofservicing existing debt, providing services, and rebuildingdamaged infrastructure.John Kallenborn at Chase Bank in New Orleans thinks the Cityshould and can avoid a bankruptcy filing. In an interview withDeon Roberts, writing for the New Orleans City Business newspaper,Mr. Kallenborn explains that a reorganization under Chapter 9 ofthe Bankruptcy Code might reduce $50 million in debt service to$25 million, but \"the problem with it is that we don't really havea debt problem in the city of New Orleans. We've got a revenueproblem,\" he said.\"You wouldn't create any revenues, which is what you really need,\"Mr. Kallenborn continued.Mr. Kallenborn related to Mr. Roberts that he has been recruiting10 foreign and large banks with New Orleans operations to give thecity a $150-million, three-year loan to fund basic services. Mr.Kallenborn wouldn't say how many lenders have committed. His bankhas agreed to loan $50 million.\"We're cobbling it together slowly but surely,\" Mr. Kallenbornsaid. \"I don't know what probability we have.\" Mr. Kallenbornsaid there's a 33% chance \"that we will call back to the city andsay that we were unsuccessful. That happens. You shouldn't beshocked. It's not an easy credit. [New Orleans'] revenues wentfrom $475 million to $100 million. You're in a trough and it'sjust hard for lenders sometimes to step up during a trough. \"Thequestion is just how fast are revenues going to come back.\" Theloan would buy the city time for revenues to pick up, he said.\"If this (loan) doesn't happen, I don't know what Plan B is,\" Mr.Kallenborn told Mr. Roberts.NORSHIELD ASSET: Chapter 15 Petition Summary--------------------------------------------Petitioner: Eric Rodier RSM Richter, Inc. 2, Place Alexis Nihon, Suite 2200 Montreal, Quebec H3Z3C2Debtor: Norshield Asset Management (Canada) Ltd.Debtor affiliates with related foreign proceedings: Entity ------ Norshield Investment Partners Holdings Ltd. Olympus United Fund Holdings Corporation Olympus United Funds Corporation Olympus United Bank and Trust SCC Olympus United Group Inc. Norshield Capital Management Corporation Honeybee Software Technologies Inc.Case No.: 06-40997Type of Business: The Debtors offer financial services, hedge fund management and alternative investment solutions.Chapter 15 Petition Date: May 30, 2006Court: District of Minnesota (Minneapolis)Judge: Robert J. KresselPetitioner's Counsel: John C. Thomas Dorsey & Whitney LLP 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1498 Tel: (612) 340-2600 Fax: (612) 340-2868Estimated Assets: $10 Million to $50 MillionEstimated Debts: More than $100 MillionNORTHWEST AIRLINES: Wants to Advance Employee Defense Costs-----------------------------------------------------------Northwest Airlines Corp. and its debtor-affiliates ask the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York forpermission to advance the defense costs incurred by certaindirectors, officers or employees who are named as defendants incertain pending ERISA and securities class actions. Class Action SuitsOn October 14, 2005, Jennifer Karpiuk filed a complaint in theUnited States District Court for the District of Minnesota onbehalf of a purported class of participants in various Northwest-sponsored retirement plans, alleging violations of the EmploymentRetirement Income Security Act of 1974. On November 3, 2005, NeilHastings filed a nearly identical complaint with the MinnesotaDistrict Court.On December 20, 2005, Bernard J. Gesenhues filed a complaint inthe United States District Court for the Southern District of NewYork on behalf of a purported class of persons who purchased orotherwise acquired Northwest securities during the relevant classperiod alleging violations of the Securities and Exchange Act of1934.On April 7, 2006, various participants in Northwest Airlines-sponsored retirement and pension plans filed a complaint in theUnited States District Court for the Southern District of NewYork on behalf of a purported class of participants in the Plans,alleging ERISA violations. The plaintiffs are: -- Bruce W. Cress, Peter Ochabauer, Walter Boulden, Keith Schilling, Mark A. Knudsen, and Christopher J. Parkyn, allegedly participants in both the Northwest Airlines Retirement Savings Plan for Pilot Employees and the Northwest Airlines Pension Plan for Pilot Employees; and -- Amanda R. Ochabauer and Bernard C. Larkin, allegedly participants in both the Northwest Airlines Retirement Savings Plan for Contract Employees and the Northwest Airlines Pension Plan for Contract Employees. Class Action DefendantsThe ERISA Complaints name 26 individuals and two committees asdefendants. Among the defendants are: a. Douglas Steenland, the Debtors' chief executive officer; b. Terri Keimig, the Debtors' director of Retirement Savings and Stock Plans; c. Timothy Meginnes, vice president of Compensation Benefits; d. Michael Becker, senior vice president of Human Resources and Labor Relations; e. Daniel Matthews, senior vice president and treasurer; f. Robert Brodin, the Debtors' former senior vice president of Labor Relations and is currently a Debtors' consultant to supervising labor negotiations with the their pilots union; g. four current members of the Debtors' Board of Directors: -- Mr. Gary Wilson, -- Mr. Frederic Malek, -- Mr. Dennis Hightower, and -- Mr. George Kourpias; h. Richard Blum and V.A. Ravindran, the Debtors' former directors; i. Richard Anderson and John Dasburg, the Debtors' former chief executive officers; and j. James Mathews, the Debtors' former vice president of Finance and chief accounting officer.The Securities Complaint is also brought against the Debtors'current or former officers and board members: -- Mr. Steenland, -- Mr. Wilson, -- Bernard Han, a former officer, and -- Alfred Checchi, a former member of the Debtors' Board of Directors.Northwest previously filed a request to stay the Class Actions.The Court denied the Debtors' request, noting that there appearsto be a large deductible in the case that would leave thedefendants uninsured for up to $5,000,000 and that the insurer'sobligation to defend does not provide for defense costs in theinterim.Judge Gropper added that the Debtors have their remedies beforethe Court. He held that the incurrence of costs that the Debtorshave obligations to advance under their charter might constitutean immediate distraction.Gregory M. Petrick, Esq., at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP,in New York, notes that the Class Action Defendants are entitledunder applicable state law and Northwest's bylaws toindemnification, including the advancement of legal expenses,including attorneys' fees, incurred to defend the Class Actions.Northwest is the owner of two liability insurance policies: a. an Employee Benefit Plan Fiduciary Liability Insurance Policy with National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, as issuer, which provides coverage for loss, including defense costs, resulting from claims against Northwest, certain of its benefit plans, plan fiduciaries or administrators, arising from an actual or alleged violation of fiduciary duties with respect to an ERISA plan; and b. an Executive and Organization Liability Insurance Policy -- the D&O Policy -- with the National Union, which provides coverage for loss, including defense costs, arising from claims against an executive or employee of Northwest, arising from any actual or alleged act or omission by such executive or employee in his or her official capacity.Mr. Petrick discloses that, in the case of an indemnifiable loss,National Union is liable to Northwest for the amount of loss inexcess of the retention amount of $5,000,000 under each of theFiduciary Policy and the D&O Policy.In the event of a loss that Northwest has neither indemnified noris permitted or required to indemnify pursuant to law or contractor charter, bylaws, operating agreement or similar documents ofNorthwest, the Policies provide for coverage by National Unionwithout regard to any retention.Accordingly, the Debtors propose to advance the defense costs ofthe Class Action Defendants up to the retention amounts under thePolicies.Mr. Petrick asserts that it is in the Debtors' best intereststhat the Class Action Defendants not incur personal pecuniaryinjury because of their employment with the Debtors and as aresult of the Class Actions, which create the potential fordistraction of the Debtors' key employees from the task ofreorganizing. About Northwest AirlinesNorthwest Airlines Corporation (OTC: NWACQ) -- http://www.nwa.com/-- is the world's fourth largest airline with hubs at Detroit,Minneapolis/St. Paul, Memphis, Tokyo and Amsterdam, andapproximately 1,400 daily departures. Northwest is a member ofSkyTeam, an airline alliance that offers customers one of theworld's most extensive global networks. Northwest and its travelpartners serve more than 900 cities in excess of 160 countries onsix continents. The Company and 12 affiliates filed for chapter11 protection on Sept. 14, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead Case No.05-17930). Bruce R. Zirinsky, Esq., and Gregory M. Petrick, Esq.,at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP in New York, and Mark C.Ellenberg, Esq., at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP inWashington represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has retained AkinGump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP as its bankruptcy counsel in theDebtors' chapter 11 cases. When the Debtors filed for protectionfrom their creditors, they listed $14.4 billion in total assetsand $17.9 billion in total debts. (Northwest Airlines BankruptcyNews, Issue No. 27; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc.,215/945-7000).NORTHWEST AIRLINES: Honeywell Wants $889,644 Claim Paid-------------------------------------------------------Honeywell International Inc., asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of New York to: -- allow its $889,644 administrative expense claim against Northwest Airlines Corp. and its debtor-affiliates; and -- direct the Debtors to promptly pay Honeywell's allowed claim.Pursuant to various prepetition executory contracts, Honeywellprovides service, repair and maintenance on aircraft componentsinstalled on the Debtors' aircraft. Honeywell also supplies theDebtors with parts related to its service, repair and maintenanceof the aircraft components.Brian H. Meldrum, Esq., at Jenner & Block LLP, Chicago, Illinois,relates that the Debtors have refused to pay $889,644 in invoicesthat Honeywell issued for the postpetition delivery of newaircraft components, and maintenance and service on thoseequipment.In October 2005, Northwest Airlines, Inc., commenced an adversaryproceeding against Honeywell. According to Mr. Meldrum, theDebtors asked the Court to compel Honeywell to continue to repairtheir equipment, even though they were refusing to pay all ofHoneywell's postpetition invoices. The Debtors asserted thatHoneywell's repair services were \"essential to operate aircraft\".The Debtors, which have made partial payments of some of theinvoices, have not formally stated why they are refusing to payother, or parts of, invoices. Honeywell has gleaned, however,that the Debtors may be contending that some of the workperformed by Honeywell was performed prepetition, even though thefull repair was not complete until postpetition and under theapplicable contractual terms and conditions payments would nothave been due until all of the work was done, Mr. Meldrum tellsthe Court.\"If this is indeed [the Debtors'] purported justification forfailing to pay Honeywell, [their] position is without merit,\"asserts Mr. Meldrum. The Debtors' argument evidences afundamental misunderstanding about the calculation of the amountof administrative claims, he added.Mr. Meldrum informs the Court that the executory contractscontain confidentiality provisions prohibiting the parties fromdisclosing proprietary information. Therefore, any invoices orcontracts submitted to the Court must be submitted under seal.Honeywell is prepared to submit the applicable contracts andinvoices under seal should the Court request them.Northwest Airlines Corporation (OTC: NWACQ) -- http://www.nwa.com/-- is the world's fourth largest airline with hubs at Detroit,Minneapolis/St. Paul, Memphis, Tokyo and Amsterdam, andapproximately 1,400 daily departures. Northwest is a member ofSkyTeam, an airline alliance that offers customers one of theworld's most extensive global networks. Northwest and its travelpartners serve more than 900 cities in excess of 160 countries onsix continents. The Company and 12 affiliates filed for chapter11 protection on Sept. 14, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Lead Case No.05-17930). Bruce R. Zirinsky, Esq., and Gregory M. Petrick, Esq.,at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP in New York, and Mark C.Ellenberg, Esq., at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP inWashington represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has retained AkinGump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP as its bankruptcy counsel in theDebtors' chapter 11 cases. When the Debtors filed for protectionfrom their creditors, they listed $14.4 billion in total assetsand $17.9 billion in total debts. (Northwest Airlines BankruptcyNews, Issue No. 27; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc.,215/945-7000).NRG ENERGY: Rejects Mirant Corp.'s $8 Billion Acquisition Proposal------------------------------------------------------------------Mirant Corporation made a proposal to acquire NRG Energy, Inc. ata premium of approximately 33% to NRG's share price as of Tuesday,May 30, 2006. The proposal would be immediately accretive to thepro forma free cash flow per share of Mirant. Mirant received afinancing commitment from JPMorgan of approximately $11.5 billionfor the transaction.NRG flatly rejected the proposal without engaging in anydiscussions with Mirant. Mirant continues to believe that theproposal creates significant value for the owners of bothcompanies and has decided to make its proposal public in a letterto NRG's board of directors.Edward R. Muller, Mirant's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,stated in the letter that:\"We were disappointed that you would reject so quickly on behalfof your shareholders, without any discussion with us, ouracquisition proposal of May 10, 2006, which provides yourshareholders a substantial premium to their share price and theopportunity to participate in the additional value creation weexpect from the combined company. We think that it is importantfor your shareholders to be informed of such a compellingopportunity, and, therefore, we are simultaneously releasing thisletter to the public.\"In the transaction we proposed, your shareholders would receive,at their election, $57.50 per share in cash or Mirant Corporationcommon stock at an exchange ratio of 2.25 Mirant shares for eachshare of NRG common stock, based upon our understanding that youhave 137.5 million fully diluted shares outstanding. Yourshareholders' elections to receive the total of approximately$3.9 billion in cash (representing 50% of the total consideration)or Mirant common stock would be subject to proration to preservethe 50/50 cash/stock mix in the deal.\"This transaction would provide a blended value of approximately$57.16 per share of NRG common stock and would represent asubstantial premium of approximately 33% to NRG's share price,based on the closing prices of Mirant and NRG on Tuesday, May 30,2006. In addition, your shareholders would receive a premium ofapproximately 33% to your one-year average trading price andapproximately 55% to your two-year average trading price.\"We think that a combination of Mirant and NRG would create anenterprise with significant opportunities for expense andoperational synergies and a national footprint that is withoutparallel. The combination would generate a number of specific andcompelling benefits. Our best estimate of the annual cost savingsfrom the reduction of overlapping functions is $150 million (basedon publicly available information), in addition to significantopportunities for cost savings from the procurement and use offuel and in the application of emissions credits. The combinationalso would diversify the risks associated with the assets andoperations of both companies. In addition, the combination wouldcreate the largest independent power company in the United Stateswith a strong presence in four key regions (Texas, Mid- Atlantic,Northeast and California). The combined company would have over43,000 megawatts globally, with over 37,500 megawatts in theUnited States. Approximately 32% of its domestic capacity wouldbe low-cost, baseload generating capacity. Finally, thecombination would enhance liquidity and value for the shareholdersof both companies. We estimate that the combined company wouldhave adjusted EBITDA for 2007 in excess of $3 billion. Thetransaction would be immediately accretive to Mirant's pro formafree cash flow per share. In short, we think that the combinedcompany would deliver superior returns to our combined shareholderbase, with benefits flowing to our respective customers, employeesand other constituencies as well.\"Mirant emerged from Chapter 11 on January 3, 2006, with whatmost observers characterize as the strongest balance sheet inthe industry. Since Jan. 3, 2006, a total of approximately275 million of our shares have traded, representing approximately92% of our total outstanding shares. Our hedging strategy hasbeen effective in reducing risk while improving our earningsprofile. We currently expect that cash flows from operationsthrough 2011 will be sufficient to fund our forecasted capitalexpenditures, including those for required environmental controls.Finally, we have a new management team with extensive experiencein the industry.\"We think that now is the right time to pursue a combination ofour companies, and we are committed to doing so on an expeditedbasis. Our Board of Directors has approved our proposal, and weare prepared to begin negotiations of the terms of our proposalwith you immediately and to enter into a definitive mergeragreement and complete the transaction as soon as possible. Wehave received a financing commitment from JPMorgan ofapproximately $11.5 billion which, when combined with ouravailable cash, will: * fund the cash portion of the purchase consideration for your common and, if necessary, preferred stock; * refinance your senior credit facilities; and * fund the purchase of your 7.250% Senior Notes and 7.375% Senior Notes pursuant to a change of control offer at a price equal to 101% of the aggregate principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest.\"The indebtedness of our subsidiaries, including Mirant AmericasGeneration, LLC and Mirant North America, LLC, would remain inplace. We expect that due diligence can be completed quickly. Inaddition, given the complementary geographies of our respectiveoperations, we expect that all regulatory approvals will beobtained expeditiously. With your cooperation, we think that wecan close the transaction in 2006.\"We expect your shareholders to respond enthusiastically to thistransaction: current shareholders who wish to exit will have theopportunity to do so at an attractive premium; those shareholderswho choose to continue as investors in the combined company willreceive both an attractive premium and have the opportunity toparticipate in the additional value creation we expect from thecombination. We believe ardently in the wisdom and strategicvalue of this transaction and the benefits it offers to ourcombined shareholders and stakeholders. This matter has thehighest priority for us.\" About MirantHeadquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, Mirant Corporation --http://www.mirant.com/-- is a competitive energy company that produces and sells electricity in North America, the Caribbean,and the Philippines. Mirant owns or leases more than 18,000megawatts of electric generating capacity globally. MirantCorporation filed for chapter 11 protection on July 14, 2003(Bankr. N.D. Tex. 03-46590), and emerged under the terms of aconfirmed Second Amended Plan on Jan. 3, 2006. Thomas E.Lauria, Esq., at White & Case LLP, represented the Debtors intheir successful restructuring. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they listed $20,574,000,000 inassets and $11,401,000,000 in debts. About NRG EnergyHeadquartered in Princeton, New Jersey, NRG Energy, Inc. -- http://www.nrgenergy.com/-- currently owns and operates a diverse portfolio of power-generating facilities, primarily in theNortheast, South Central and Western regions of the United States.Its operations include baseload, intermediate, peaking, andcogeneration facilities, thermal energy production and energyresource recovery facilities. NRG also has ownership interests ingenerating facilities in Australia and Germany. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Jan. 16, 2006,Fitch Ratings placed a 'BB' rating to NRG's $5.2 billion securedcredit facility, consisting of a $3.2 billion secured term loan Band $2 billion of revolving credit/synthetic letter of creditfacilities, a 'B' rating to NRG's proposed $3.6 billion issuanceof senior unsecured notes, and a 'CCC+' rating to NRG's proposedissuance of $500 million mandatory convertible preferred stock.In addition, Fitch has assigned NRG a 'B' issuer default rating,as well as recovery ratings for the debt instruments. Fitch saidthe Rating Outlook is Stable.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Jan. 9, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its 'B+' corporatecredit rating on power generation company NRG Energy Inc.Standard & Poor's assigned its 'BB-' rating and '1' recoveryrating to NRG's $3.2 billion first lien term loan B and$2 billion revolving credit and LOC facilities, 'B-' ratingto NRG's $3.6 billion unsecured notes, and 'CCC+' rating toNRG's $500 million mandatory convertible securities.The 'BB-' rating and '1' recovery rating on the $3.2 billionterm loan B and $2 billion revolving credit and LOC facilitiesindicate the expectation of full recovery of principal in theevent of a payment default. Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'CCC+'ratings on NRG's preferred stock issues. The stable outlookreflects Standard & Poor's view that NRG's credit quality shouldnot significantly deteriorate in the short term.NRG ENERGY: Board Believes Mirant Corp.'s Proposal Undervalues NRG------------------------------------------------------------------NRG Energy, Inc. confirmed, on May 30, 2006, that it has receivedan unsolicited proposal from Mirant Corporation regarding apotential combination in letters dated May 10 and 30, 2006.Consistent with its fiduciary duties and in consultation with itsfinancial advisor and legal counsel, NRG's Board of Directorsreviewed the Mirant proposal and deemed it not in the bestinterests of NRG shareholders. NRG shareholders do not need totake any action at this time.Citigroup is serving as financial advisor to NRG, and Skadden,Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP is legal counsel.On May 23, 2006, NRG sent a response letter to Edward R. Muller,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Mirant Corporation and theMirant Board of Directors.The letter from Howard Cosgrove, NRG's Chairman of the Board, andDavid Crane, NRG's President and Chief Executive Officer, statedthat:\"The Board of Directors of NRG Energy, Inc., with the assistanceof its financial and legal advisors, has reviewed and thoroughlyconsidered your May 10, 2006 letter. Based upon this review theBoard has unanimously rejected your proposal because it is not inthe best interests of NRG shareholders. The NRG Board hasspecifically authorized this response.\"As discussed below, the Board has found your proposal deficientin at least three key respects: * it significantly undervalues NRG; * our concerns about Mirant's value and your stock's relative lack of liquidity and trading history makes Mirant's stock an unacceptable currency; and, * finally, having taken into account trends and developments in the wholesale power generation sector, we do not believe this is the appropriate time to engage in a sale process.\"Having spent considerable time analyzing Mirant, its assets andprospects -- both during the three years you spent in bankruptcyand the four months since you emerged -- we have concluded thatMirant is a company and stock with flat earnings, little to nogrowth opportunity beyond 2007, substantial and imminentenvironmental capital expenditures, and significant EBITDAexposure to developing country risk. Additionally, with only afour-month trading history and an average daily trading volume of2.7 million shares during those four months, we believe thatMirant's stock lacks a sufficient track record and liquidity forus to recommend to our shareholders that they accept over 150million Mirant shares as you propose. These factors far outweighany synergistic benefits that might come from a combination of thetwo companies.\"For these reasons, NRG's Board and management strongly believethat our shareholders would be poorly served by being exposed toMirant's challenges through ownership of Mirant equity on theterms set forth in your proposal.On the question of timing, we believe our cyclical industry hasjust begun to emerge out of a multi-year trough and, over the nextcouple of years, we will experience continued robust commodityprices, supply shortfalls in our core regions, spark spreadrecovery and a rationalization of the utility industry in such away that the intrinsic value of NRG (and the value of NRG as apotential acquisition candidate) will rise rapidly. And we areconfident that we will be able to convert the rise in intrinsicvalue of NRG into increased market value. Over the past 24months, NRG's stock has appreciated 120% as the market hasrecognized the value of our asset mix, the soundness of ourstrategy and our track record in its implementation, including: * a diverse multi-regional domestic portfolio of 22,848 MW; * a substantial EBITDA growth rate past 2007 from hedges placed at rising prices; * a thriving brownfield development program across all regions; and * a history of returning capital to shareholders through two substantial share buybacks in the first 18 months of our existence.\"We are confident that our stock is poised for furtherappreciation as we capitalize on the positive industry trends andas the market comes to recognize our embedded growth potentialparticularly post-2007. In this regard, we note that the premiumreflected in your proposal is far less than the annual compoundaverage growth rate of NRG's share price appreciation.\"To clarify one point, your letter references past meetingsbetween you and our Chief Executive Officer, David Crane, on thetopic of combining NRG and Mirant. Our Company's strategicinterest in Mirant predates your tenure there and is well known toanyone who has read transcripts of your bankruptcy hearings. WhenMr. Crane discussed a combination of the two companies with youlast November, it was in the context of NRG acquiring Mirant,since at that time Mirant's stock was neither listed nor activelytraded. Once your company finally emerged from bankruptcy inJanuary 2006, our Board specifically reviewed the possibleacquisition of Mirant by NRG. We decided not to do so on thegrounds that at $25 per share Mirant's stock was overvalued, andwe were not willing to risk NRG's reputation for financialdiscipline on an overpriced bid for Mirant. When you approachedMr. Crane in March to propose a \"no premium\" acquisition of NRG byMirant, Mr. Crane advised you that such a transaction (at theprice for NRG's shares implied by your proposal) was not worthpursuing further given that it would be massively dilutive to NRGshareholders -- a point of view which neither you nor GoldmanSachs has ever attempted to refute.\"As you know, NRG believes that industry consolidation isinevitable, and we expect to participate -- either as a buyer or aseller. You should also know that we would only pursuetransactions that create unquestionable value for ourstockholders. Your proposal is simply the wrong deal at the wrongtime.\" About MirantHeadquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, Mirant Corporation --http://www.mirant.com/-- is a competitive energy company that produces and sells electricity in North America, the Caribbean,and the Philippines. Mirant owns or leases more than 18,000megawatts of electric generating capacity globally. MirantCorporation filed for chapter 11 protection on July 14, 2003(Bankr. N.D. Tex. 03-46590), and emerged under the terms of aconfirmed Second Amended Plan on Jan. 3, 2006. Thomas E.Lauria, Esq., at White & Case LLP, represented the Debtors intheir successful restructuring. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they listed $20,574,000,000 inassets and $11,401,000,000 in debts. About NRG EnergyHeadquartered in Princeton, New Jersey, NRG Energy, Inc. -- http://www.nrgenergy.com/-- currently owns and operates a diverse portfolio of power-generating facilities, primarily in theNortheast, South Central and Western regions of the United States.Its operations include baseload, intermediate, peaking, andcogeneration facilities, thermal energy production and energyresource recovery facilities. NRG also has ownership interests ingenerating facilities in Australia and Germany. * * *As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Jan. 16, 2006,Fitch Ratings placed a 'BB' rating to NRG's $5.2 billion securedcredit facility, consisting of a $3.2 billion secured term loan Band $2 billion of revolving credit/synthetic letter of creditfacilities, a 'B' rating to NRG's proposed $3.6 billion issuanceof senior unsecured notes, and a 'CCC+' rating to NRG's proposedissuance of $500 million mandatory convertible preferred stock.In addition, Fitch has assigned NRG a 'B' issuer default rating,as well as recovery ratings for the debt instruments. Fitch saidthe Rating Outlook is Stable.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Jan. 9, 2006,Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its 'B+' corporatecredit rating on power generation company NRG Energy Inc.Standard & Poor's assigned its 'BB-' rating and '1' recoveryrating to NRG's $3.2 billion first lien term loan B and$2 billion revolving credit and LOC facilities, 'B-' ratingto NRG's $3.6 billion unsecured notes, and 'CCC+' rating toNRG's $500 million mandatory convertible securities.The 'BB-' rating and '1' recovery rating on the $3.2 billionterm loan B and $2 billion revolving credit and LOC facilitiesindicate the expectation of full recovery of principal in theevent of a payment default. Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'CCC+'ratings on NRG's preferred stock issues. The stable outlookreflects Standard & Poor's view that NRG's credit quality shouldnot significantly deteriorate in the short term.ONEIDA LTD: U.S. Trustee Appoints Three-Member Equity Committee---------------------------------------------------------------Diana G. Adams, the Acting United States Trustee for Region 2,appointed three equity holders to serve on an Official Committeeof Equity Security Holders in Oneida Ltd. and its debtor-affiliates' chapter 11 cases: 1. Xerion Partners LLC & Xerion Partners II Master Fund Limited c/o Xerion Capital Partners LLC Attn: Mr. Daniel J. Arbess 450 Park Avenue, 27th Floor New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212) 940-9822 Fax: (212) 287-0740 2. LKCM Partnership Attn: Mr. Todd Truitt 301 Commerce Street, Suite 1600 Forth Worth, TX 76102 Tel: (817) 332-3235 3. The Arbitrage Fund Attn: Mr. John S. Orrico 650 Fifth Avenue, 6th Floor New York, NY 10019 Tel: (212) 259-2655Based in Oneida, New York, Oneida Ltd. -- http://www.oneida.com/-- is the world's largest manufacturer of stainless steel andsilverplated flatware for both the Consumer and Foodserviceindustries, and the largest supplier of dinnerware to thefoodservice industry. Oneida is also a leading supplier of avariety of crystal, glassware and metal serveware for the tabletopindustries. The Company and its 8 debtor-affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on March 19, 2006 (Bankr. S.D. N.Y. CaseNos. 06-10489 through 06-10496). Douglas P. Bartner, Esq., atShearman & Sterling LLP represents the Debtors. Credit SuisseSecurities (USA) LLC is the Debtors' financial advisor. Scott L.Hazan, Esq., and Lorenzo Marinuzzi, Esq., at Otterbourg,Steindler, Houston & Rosen, P.C., represent the Official Committeeof Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filed for protectionfrom their creditors, they listed $305,329,000 in total assets and$332,227,000 in total debts. On May 12, 2006, Judge Gropperapproved the Debtors' disclosure statement.ONEIDA LTD: Court Okays Otterbourg Steindler as Panel's Counsel---------------------------------------------------------------The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors appointed in OneidaLtd. and its debtor-affiliates' bankruptcy cases obtainedpermission from the Honorable Allan L. Gropper of the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York inManhattan to retain Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston & Rosen, P.C.,as its bankruptcy counsel, nunc pro tunc to April 13, 2006.Otterbourg Steindler will: (a) assist and advise the Committee in its consultation with the Debtors relative to the administration of the Debtors' bankruptcy cases; (b) attend meetings and negotiate with the representatives of the Debtors; (c) assist and advise the Committee in its examination and analysis of the conduct of the Debtors' affairs; (d) assist the Committe in the review, analysis and negotiation of the filed plan and disclusure statement, as well as any plan of reorganization or related disclosure statement that may be filed; (e) assist the Committee in the review, analysis, and negotiation of any financing agreements, including the proposed exit facility with Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC and Credit Suisse; (f) take all necessary action to protect and preserve the interests of the Committee, including: (1) possible prosecution of actions on its behalf; (2) if appropriate, negotiations concerning all litigation in which the Debtors are involved; and (3) if appropriate, review and analysis of claims filed against the Debtors' estates; (g) generally prepare on behalf of the Committee all necessary motions, applications, answers, orders, reports and papers in support of positions taken by the Committee; (h) appear, as appropriate, before the Bankruptcy Court, the Appellate Courts, and the United States Trustee, and to protect the interests of the Committee before those courts and before the U.S. Trustee; and (i) perform all other necessary legal services in the Debtors' cases.Scott L. Hazan, Esq., a member at Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston &Rosen, P.C., discloses that the Firm's professionals bill: Designation Hourly Rate ----------- ----------- Partner or Counsel $490 - $725 Associate $240 - $525 Paralegal and Legal Assistant $125 - $195Mr. Hazan assures the Court that Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston &Rosen, P.C., is disinterested as that term is defined in Section101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code.Based in Oneida, New York, Oneida Ltd. -- http://www.oneida.com/-- is the world's largest manufacturer of stainless steel andsilverplated flatware for both the Consumer and Foodserviceindustries, and the largest supplier of dinnerware to thefoodservice industry. Oneida is also a leading supplier of avariety of crystal, glassware and metal serveware for the tabletopindustries. The Company and its 8 debtor-affiliates filed forChapter 11 protection on March 19, 2006 (Bankr. S.D. N.Y. CaseNos. 06-10489 through 06-10496). Douglas P. Bartner, Esq., atShearman & Sterling LLP represents the Debtors. Credit SuisseSecurities (USA) LLC is the Debtors' financial advisor. Scott L.Hazan, Esq., and Lorenzo Marinuzzi, Esq., at Otterbourg,Steindler, Houston & Rosen, P.C., represent the Official Committeeof Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filed for protectionfrom their creditors, they listed $305,329,000 in total assets and$332,227,000 in total debts. On May 12, 2006, Judge Gropperapproved the Debtors' disclosure statement.OPTINREALBIG.COM: Judge Tallman Dismisses Chapter 11 Cases----------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Howard R. Tallman of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe District of Colorado dismissed the chapter 11 cases ofOptInRealBig.com, LLC, and its owner, Scott Allen Richter.The Debtors sought dismissal of their cases after reachingsettlements with Microsoft Corporation and American Family MutualInsurance Co. Microsoft and American Family each filed suitsagainst OptInRealBig prior to the company's bankruptcy filing.Microsoft's suit, along with separate related suits, allegedunsolicited e-mail violations. Consequently, American Family, asthe company's insurer, sought declaratory relief denying insurancecoverage for costs of defense and liability associated with thevarious lawsuits filed against the Debtors.In its decision, the Court concluded that the mediation of theDebtors' litigation matters will benefit most of its creditors.In addition, the Court ruled that Infinite Monkeys & Co., LLC maylitigate its claim against the Debtors in the state or federalcourts of California.Infinite Monkeys filed a $49,168,000 claim against the Debtors forrecoverable preferences and subsequently opposed dismissal of theDebtors' cases. The SettlementsAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Aug. 18, 2005,the Debtors filed for bankruptcy to stay 13 legal actions filedagainst them.To avoid the costly and time consuming litigations, the Debtorsengaged in settlement discussions with Microsoft and AmericanFamily, their primary adversaries.The Debtors agreed to pay Microsoft $7 million within 24 hoursafter their chapter 11 cases are dismissed. The Debtors alsoagreed with American Family for the release of a $2.6 millionclaim.Headquartered in Westminster, Colorado, OptinRealBig.com, LLC, isan e-mail marketing company. The Company filed for chapter 11protection on March 25, 2005 (Bankr. D. Colo. Case No. 05-16304).John C. Smiley, Esq., at Lindquist & Vennum P., LLP, representsthe Debtor. No Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors had beenappointed in this case. When the Debtor filed for protection fromits creditors, it listed estimated assets of $1 million to $10million and estimated debts of $50 million to $100 million.ORIS AUTOMOTIVE: BBK Okayed to Provide Management Support Services------------------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Tamara O Mitchell of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Northern District of Alabama in Birmingham gave OrisAutomotive Parts Alabama, Ltd., authority to employ BBK, Ltd.,nunc pro tunc to March 16, 2006, pursuant to Section 327 of theU.S. Bankruptcy Code.BBK will provide management and operations support services. BBKemployees who will work for the Debtor are: 1. Keith Updike will bill $220 per hour. He will act as the interim plant manager. He will manage the Debtor's hourly and salaried employees. 2. Walt Ledger will bill $220 per hour. He will expedite purchases of materials. He will also provide support to the assembly operation. 3. John Froelich will bill $185 per hour. He will support the engineering, welding, and fabrication departments. 4. John Parhar will bill $185 per hour. He will provide technical support. He will also oversee the Debtor's performance relative to addressing customer issues.The Debtor assures the Court that BBK has no interest adverse tothe Debtor or its estates.Headquartered in McCalla, Alabama, Oris Automotive Parts Alabama,Ltd. -- http://www.oris-gmbh.de/-- manufactures automotive parts. The company filed for chapter 11 protection on March 16, 2006(Bankr. N.D. Ala. Case No. 06-00813). Clark R. Hammond, Esq., atJohnston, Barton, Proctor & Powell LLP, represents the Debtor inits restructuring efforts. When the Debtor filed for protectionfrom its creditors, it estimated assets between $1 million to$10 million and debts between $10 million to $50 million.OWENS CORNING: Wants to Expand Ernst & Young's Scope of Employment------------------------------------------------------------------Owens Corning and its debtor-affiliates want to further expand thescope of Ernst & Young LLP's employment to include: a. additional tax advisory services with respect to the Debtors' management of intellectual property, global equity compensation plans and international restructuring; and b. accounting services in support of the Debtors' preparation for the hearing to consider confirmation of their Fifth Amended Plan of Reorganization.Specifically, the Debtors propose that Ernst & Young performthese additional services:A. Intellectual Property Planning * Providing analysis of the tax implications associated with various intellectual property management and ownership alternatives, including re-evaluating the Debtors' current structure from a state and local tax planning perspective. * Providing analysis of the ability and potential tax cost/benefit opportunities for the Debtors to migrate ownership of economic rights to selected technologies currently in development. * Providing assistance with the formulation of a strategy for a proposed restructuring that will involve the execution of a cost sharing arrangement under current cost sharing regulations. * Providing assistance with respect to the preparation of necessary agreements regarding implementation of the proposed restructuring. * Providing a post-implementation review plan for monitoring of the ongoing management of the Debtors' intellectual property.B. Equity Compensation Plans * Assisting the Debtors in their review of the tax requirements associated with the implementation of equity compensation plans to employees worldwide. * Conducting a tax feasibility review with respect to identifying key compliance issues and obstacles regarding equity plan implementation and tax due diligence and expatriate tax due diligence. * Providing assistance to the Debtors with respect to chargeback and corporate tax deduction issues. * Conducting meetings and conference calls with the Debtors to discuss legislative changes and developments that may impact the proposed equity compensation plans. * Providing assistance regarding, among other things, necessary tax filings, the calculation of taxable gain and various valuation and other services with respect to the tax issues and implications of the equity compensation plans.C. International Restructuring * Providing assistance, tax advisory and related valuation services with respect to analyzing, developing and implementing an international holding company structure designed to assist the Debtors with, among others, an efficient post-emergence foreign cash management vehicle, cash repatriation and international expansion. * Designing and implementing a variety of strategies to reduce foreign country income tax liabilities, specifically in Canada, Brazil and Mexico.The Debtors propose that Ernst & Young will provide theadditional confirmation accounting services, for and at thedirection of Saul Ewing LLP and Sidley Austin LLP, the Debtors'bankruptcy counsel. Owens Corning VP and General Counsel John W.Christy advises the Court that specific terms and conditions thatwill govern the provision of the accounting services are stillsubject to final documentation. Thus, the Debtors plan to submitadditional documents to supplement the Application.As set forth in their Fifth Amended Plan, the Debtors are seekingto re-establish the use of equity compensation plans to attractand retain employees, provide incentives to them and to alignemployee interests with those of the Debtors after emergence. Tothat end, the Debtors proposed the distribution of equity awardsto their employees around the world under two equity compensationplans.In connection with the equity compensation plan services, Ernst &Young will be coordinating with its allied law firm, Donahue &Partners LLP.Mr. Christy notes that the firm has already commenced performingsome of the additional services on April 1, 2006.Pursuant to Section 327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Debtorsseek the Court's permission to expand Ernst & Young's employmentto include the additional services, nunc pro tunc to April 1,2006.The firm's professionals presently expected to have primaryresponsibility for providing services to the Debtors and theircurrent hourly rates are: IP Planning & Equity Comp. Billing Category Restructuring Plans ---------------- ------------- ------------ National Principal/Partner $840 - $640 $840 - $640 Principal/Partner $600 - $480 $677 - $611 Manager/Senior Manager $480 - $345 $583 - $403 Senior/Staff $320 - $160 $321 - $200Ernst & Young updates its billing rates annually on July 1.Owens Corning (OTC: OWENQ.OB) (BULLETIN BOARD: OWENQ.OB) --http://www.owenscorning.com/-- manufactures fiberglass insulation, roofing materials, vinyl windows and siding, patiodoors, rain gutters and downspouts. Headquartered in Toledo,Ohio, the Company filed for chapter 11 protection on Oct. 5, 2000(Bankr. Del. Case. No. 00-03837). Norman L. Pernick, Esq., atSaul Ewing LLP, represents the Debtors. Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., atCaplin & Drysdale, Chartered, represents the Official Committee ofAsbestos Creditors. James J. McMonagle serves as the LegalRepresentative for Future Claimants and is represented by EdmundM. Emrich, Esq., at Kaye Scholer LLP. (Owens Corning BankruptcyNews, Issue No. 131; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc.,215/945-7000)PARTS PLUS: Del. Bank. Court Closes Remaining Chapter 11 Case------------------------------------------------------------- The Honorable Brendan Linehan Shannon of the U.S. Bankruptcy Courtfor the District of Delaware entered a final decree closing TheParts Plus Group, Inc.'s chapter 11 case, at Parts Plus' request.Peter C. Hughes, Esq., at Dilworth Paxson LLP, in Philadelphia,Pennsylvania, reminded the Court that the Debtors' First AmendedJoint Liquidating Plan of Reorganization took effect onNov. 10, 2003. On May 28, 2004, the Court closed the bankruptcycases of each of the subsidiary Debtors.Parts Plus has no ongoing operations, Mr. Hughes pointed out. Thefew remaining accounts receivable have been assigned to PartsPlus' secured lender. All of Parts Plus' other assets has beenliquidated. Under the Plan, the collected cash account, which isthe source of funds to pay unsecured creditors, is to be createdand administered by the liquidation administrator. Accordingly,there are no further assets for the Debtor to administer.The Parts Plus Group, Inc., was a distributor of auto partsserving independent and chain car repair shops, new car dealers,municipalities and other fleet owners in the Eastern UnitedStates. The Company and its debtor-affiliates filed for chapter11 protection on March 24, 2003 (Bankr. Del. Case No. 03-10875).Peter C Hughes, Esq., and Derrick A. Dyer, Esq., at DilworthPaxson LLP represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.Charles J. Brown, Esq., at Elzufon Austin Reardon Tarlov & Mondelland William David Sullivan, Esq., at Buchanan Ingersoll PCrepresent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.PATH 1: Posts $1.7 Million Net Loss in Quarter Ended March 31-------------------------------------------------------------Path 1 Network Technologies Inc. filed its first quarter financialstatements for the three months ended March 31, 2006, with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on May 23, 2006.The Company reported a $1,770,000 net loss on $614,000 of revenuesfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $2,333,000in total assets and $4,456,000 in total liabilities, resulting ina $2,136,000 stockholders' deficit.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $1,201,000 in total current assets available topay $2,032,000 in total current liabilities coming due within thenext 12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a0f Going Concern DoubtSwenson Advisors, LLP, in New York, raised substantial doubt aboutPath 1 Network Technologies Inc.'s ability to continue as agoing concern after auditing the Company's consolidated financialstatements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005. The auditor pointedto the Company's operating losses and inability to raiseadditional capital.Path 1 Network Technologies Inc. provides a variety of softwareand services used for real-time, high-quality audio and video-on-demand distribution over Internet Protocol. Its Cx1000 broadcastvideo gateway is used to transmit and receive ASI and SDI videoimages over FastE and Gigabit Ethernet network interfaces. PaulsonCapital owns almost 14% of it.PBS HOLDING: March 31 Balance Sheet Upside Down by $486,382-----------------------------------------------------------PBS Holding, Inc., filed its first quarter financial statementsfor the three months ended March 31, 2006, with the Securities andExchange Commission on May 19, 2006.The Company reported a $398,171 net loss on $1,229,840 of revenuesfor the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $702,191 intotal assets and $1,188,573 in total liabilities, resulting in a$486,382 stockholders' deficit.The Company's March 31 balance sheet also showed strainedliquidity with $644,048 in total current assets available to pay$1,171,906 in total current liabilities coming due within the next12 months.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?9f6 Going Concern DoubtMadsen & Associates CPAs'. INC. in Murray, Utah, raisedsubstantial doubt about PBS Holding, Inc.'s ability to continue asa going concern after auditing the Company's consolidatedfinancial statements for the years ended Dec. 31, 2005, and 2004.The auditor pointed to the Company's need for additional workingcapital for its planned activity and to service its debt.PBS Holding, Inc., provides human resource outsourcing servicesthrough its subsidiaries, PBS LLC, Primary HR and AHJR.PLIANT: Wells Fargo Says Plan Violates Indentures & Bankr. Code---------------------------------------------------------------In February 2006, Well Fargo Bank, N.A., succeeded WilmingtonTrust Company in its capacity as indenture trustee and became theSecond Lien Indenture Trustee under the Second Lien NotesIndenture.\"Despite the contentions of the Debtors, these bankruptcy caseswould not be doomed by denial or delay of confirmation of thePlan [of Reorganization],\" Howard A. Cohen, Esq., at DrinkerBiddle & Reath LLP, in Wilmington, Delaware, asserts.\"Rather denial or delay of confirmation would permit the partiesan opportunity to preserve the full value of the Debtors andavoid a further financial restructuring or subsequent bankruptcyproceeding through either the confirmation of a permissible planor a plan that restructures the Debtors' capital structure, trulyright sizes the Debtors' balance sheet, ensures solvency andimproves liquidity.\"Mr. Cohen tells Judge Walrath that one of the most obviousdefects of the Plan is that it improperly classifies the Class 5Second Lien Note Claims as unimpaired and thus does not complywith Sections 1129(a)(1) and (8) of the Bankruptcy Code.Although the Plan asserts that the Claims of the Second LienNoteholders are unimpaired, and classifies them as such, thoseclaims are clearly impaired as the treatment provided under thePlan does not \"leave[] unaltered the legal, equitable, andcontractual rights\" to which the Second Lien Notes Indenture areentitled, Mr. Cohen maintains.Moreover, the Plan proposes to issue Tack-On Notes -- additionalFirst Lien Notes -- to Holders of Class 7 Old Note Claimspursuant to the First Lien Notes Indenture, which makes the Tack-On Notes secured instruments. Consequently, the Plan, ifconfirmed, would effectuate a mechanism whereby a portion of theOld Note Claim would be transformed from unsecured debt intosecured debt. Mr. Cohen points out that not only would it besecured debt, but it would be senior to that of the Second LienNoteholders -- to whom the Old Noteholders are contractuallysubordinated.The Debtors also seek to provide Old Noteholders with a\"Bondholder Additional Consideration,\" which is an amount in cashequal to 1% of the principal amount of Old Notes held by a holderof an Old Note Claim. The Debtors define the BondholderAdditional Consideration as \"not a payment in respect of suchprincipal amount of Old Notes but instead shall be a payment onaccount of the acceptance of the Plan by Class 7,\" Mr. Cohennotes.There is no basis under the Bankruptcy Code to provide aconstituency with any sort of payment or distribution other thanon account of a claim, Mr. Cohen contends.Thus, Wells Fargo asserts that the Plan should not be confirmedbecause: (a) it seeks to impermissibly alter the contractual rights between non-debtor third parties, in violation of Section 510 of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) it violates the Second Lien Note Indenture and Old Notes Indenture by the issuance of the Tack-on Notes; or the alternative, New Subordinated Notes, Bondholder Additional Consideration and payment of the Consenting Noteholders' Professional Fees, in violation of Sections 510 and 1129(a)(1) and contrary to the X-Clause Provision contained in the Second Lien Notes Indenture; and (c) the payment of the Bondholder Additional Consideration violates Sections 1123(a)(3) and (6), 1129(a)(1) and 1129(b)(2)(B).Wells Fargo asks the Court to: (a) deny confirmation of the Plan; or (b) in the alternative, withhold the confirmation of the Plan until the issues it raised have been addressed satisfactorily or the Plan is amended consistent with its Objection and the Bankruptcy Code.Headquartered in Schaumburg, Illinois, Pliant Corporation --http://www.pliantcorp.com/- produces value-added film and flexible packaging products for personal care, medical, food,industrial and agricultural markets. The Debtor and 10 of itsaffiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on Jan. 3, 2006(Bankr. D. Del. Lead Case No. 06-10001). James F. Conlan, Esq.,at Sidley Austin LLP, and Edmon L. Morton, Esq., and Robert S.Brady, Esq., at Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor, represent theDebtors in their restructuring efforts. The Debtors tappedMcMillan Binch Mendelsohn LLP, as their Canadian bankruptcycounsel. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice named RSMRichter, Inc., as the Debtors' information officer in theirrestructuring proceeding under Companies Creditors Arrangement Actin Canada. Kenneth A. Rosen, Esq., at Lowenstein Sandler, P.C.,serves as counsel to the Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors. Don A. Beskrone, Esq., at Ashby & Geddes, P.A., islocal counsel to the Creditors' Committee. As of Sept. 30, 2005,the company had $604,275,000 in total assets and $1,197,438,000 intotal debts. (Pliant Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 14; BankruptcyCreditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)REFCO INC: Must Produce Documents for Noteholders' Committee------------------------------------------------------------The Hon. Robert Drain of the United States Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of New York directed Refco Inc., and itsdebtor-affiliates to produce documents responsive to discoveryrequests to be served by the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of the9.0% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2012 issued by Refco FinanceInc. and Refco Group Ltd., LLC.Absent further Court order, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, andMesirow Financial Consulting, the Noteholders Committee'sprofessionals, may review those documents produced in response todocument requests. Stroock and Mesirow will not disclosedocuments to the extent not otherwise available to theNoteholders Committee, the general public or any other entity.However, documents may be provided to any party already subjectto an applicable confidentiality agreement.To the extent that a follow-up information from the Debtors isrequired, the Noteholders Committee and the Debtors will firstdiscuss a consensual resolution of that request in a timelymanner.Disputes relating to Discovery Requests and Follow-up Informationmay be considered by the Court on an expedited basis. Rule 2004 RequestThe Noteholders want to obtain discovery of the Debtors, pursuantto Section 1109(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and Rule 2004 of theFederal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure in order to start analyzingintercompany claims, so as to determine the rights of the variouscreditors and parties-in-interest in the Debtors' cases.The Noteholders believe it is imperative that all creditors beable to get an understanding of the intercompany claims as soonas possible. They are concerned that this effort has been put onthe back burner while the litigation between the Refco CapitalMarkets, Ltd. account holders and the Debtors -- to enable theAccount Parties to determine their individual rights against theDebtors and other creditors and parties-in-interest -- hasmonopolized the Debtors' time and resources.The Noteholders want to receive basic information likely withinthe Debtors' immediate control that will permit them to begin anintercompany claims analysis, including the Debtors' balancesheets, general ledgers and trial balances, as well as responsivedocuments that the Debtors have already produced to otherparties-in-interest, like the Creditors' Committee, AlixPartnersand FTI Consulting.After the Intercompany Information is digested and analyzed, theNoteholders would like to obtain more detailed information andwould expect to obtain access to various of the Debtors'employees and professionals who could provide an explanation ofrelevant transactions. The Noteholders would anticipateconducting this second stage analysis in coordination with theDebtors, the Creditors' Committee, and their professionals on anagreed upon timetable.The Noteholders' request seeks limited discovery and is anattempt to begin to level the informational playing field thathas been tilted in favor of parties other than the Noteholderssince the inception of these cases, Michael J. Sage, Esq., atStroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, in New York, tell the Court.The Noteholders collectively hold approximately: (i) $210 million of the $390 million outstanding issuance of the 9% Senior Subordinated Notes; and (ii) $278 million of the $648 million due and owing pursuant to a Credit Agreement dated August 5, 2004.In the aggregate, the Noteholders hold over 53% of the Notes andover 42% of the Bank Debt. About Refco Inc.Based in New York, New York, Refco Inc. -- http://www.refco.com/-- is a diversified financial services organization withoperations in 14 countries and an extensive global institutionaland retail client base. Refco's worldwide subsidiaries aremembers of principal U.S. and international exchanges, and areamong the most active members of futures exchanges in Chicago, NewYork, London and Singapore. In addition to its futures brokerageactivities, Refco is a major broker of cash market products,including foreign exchange, foreign exchange options, governmentsecurities, domestic and international equities, emerging marketdebt, and OTC financial and commodity products. Refco is one ofthe largest global clearing firms for derivatives.The Company and 23 of its affiliates filed for chapter 11protection on Oct. 17, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-60006).J. Gregory Milmoe, Esq., at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & FlomLLP, represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Luc A.Despins, Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, representsthe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. Refco reported$16.5 billion in assets and $16.8 billion in debts to theBankruptcy Court on the first day of its chapter 11 cases.Refco LLC, an affiliate, filed for chapter 7 protection onNov. 25, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-60134). Refco, LLC, isa regulated commodity futures company that has businesses in theUnited States, London, Asia and Canada. Refco, LLC, filed forbankruptcy protection in order to consummate the sale ofsubstantially all of its assets to Man Financial Inc., a whollyowned subsidiary of Man Group plc. (Refco Bankruptcy News, IssueNo. 30; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)REFCO INC: Chapter 7 Trustee Can Liquidate Customer Claims----------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New Yorkmodified the automatic stay in Refco, LLC's chapter 7 proceedingsin order for Albert Togut, Esq., the interim Chapter 7 trusteeappointed to oversee the liquidation of Refco LLC's estate, toliquidate customer claims that are asserted in a \"specializedtribunal\" in which the Customer Litigation is currently pending.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on Apr. 21, 2006, asof Nov. 25, 2005, Refco, LLC, was a defendant in certain lawsuitspending in federal or state courts, in preparation proceedingspending before the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and inarbitration proceedings pending before the National FuturesAssociation.Vincent E. Lazar, Esq., at Jenner & Block LLP, in Chicago,Illinois, relates that substantially all of the CustomerLitigation involves claims asserted by customers of Refco LLCarising out of trading in accounts maintained at Refco LLC.Certain of the Customer Litigation Claims are subject tomandatory arbitration under the applicable agreements and law.In accordance with Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code,prosecution of the Customer Litigation is currently stayed as toRefco LLC. However, certain of the Customer Litigation, inparticular preparations proceedings pending before the CFTC wherean employee or introducing broker has been named as a co-defendant with Refco LLC, is continuing against the non-debtordefendants.Prior to filing for chapter 7 liquidation, Refco LLC wasrepresented in a significant percentage of the Customer Litigationby in-house counsel, who on occasion, also jointly representedemployees or introducing brokers who had been named as co-defendants in the litigation.Mr. Lazar asserts that the employees and introducing brokersnamed in continuing Customer Litigation generally have continuedto be represented by counsel, but Refco LLC has not beenrepresented or participated in any ongoing litigation.Refco LLC was also represented in litigation against customers byseveral sets of outside counsel. Mr. Lazar says that two ofthose two law firms have been engaged by Mr. Togut, to representhim in Customer Litigation and other specialized commoditiesdisputes with customers or brokers.A list of Refco LLC's Customer Litigation Claims is available forfree at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?81cMr. Togut will be represented in the Customer Litigation by aspecial counsel with experience in litigation and who previouslyrepresented Refco LLC in similar matters. Therefore, Mr. Togutbelieves that he is in the best position to effectively contestthe Customer Litigation Claims.With respect to Customer Litigation where an employee orintroducing broker has been named as a co-defendant with RefcoLLC, Mr. Lazar contends that the estate's interests could beprejudiced if Mr. Togut is not represented in the ongoinglitigation.Mr. Togut notes that certain of the Customer Litigation Claimsare subject to mandatory arbitration, and likely could not belitigated before the Court in any event.Considering the bar date that has been established for filingproofs of claim against the Debtor's estate, Mr. Togut intends toexpeditiously review all claims and promptly file objections toany invalid or contested claims.Mr. Togut asserts that commencing immediately the process ofliquidating Customer Litigation Claims will facilitate the promptadministration and distribution of the Debtor's estate.Mr. Togut notes that there may be additional Customer LitigationClaims of which he is unaware. In the event he determines thatit is in the estate's interests for the automatic stay to belifted, Mr. Togut seeks the Court's authority to file asupplemental document to identify any Additional CustomerLitigation Claims. About Refco Inc.Based in New York, New York, Refco Inc. -- http://www.refco.com/-- is a diversified financial services organization withoperations in 14 countries and an extensive global institutionaland retail client base. Refco's worldwide subsidiaries aremembers of principal U.S. and international exchanges, and areamong the most active members of futures exchanges in Chicago, NewYork, London and Singapore. In addition to its futures brokerageactivities, Refco is a major broker of cash market products,including foreign exchange, foreign exchange options, governmentsecurities, domestic and international equities, emerging marketdebt, and OTC financial and commodity products. Refco is one ofthe largest global clearing firms for derivatives.The Company and 23 of its affiliates filed for chapter 11protection on Oct. 17, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-60006).J. Gregory Milmoe, Esq., at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & FlomLLP, represent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts. Luc A.Despins, Esq., at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, representsthe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. Refco reported$16.5 billion in assets and $16.8 billion in debts to theBankruptcy Court on the first day of its chapter 11 cases.Refco LLC, an affiliate, filed for chapter 7 protection onNov. 25, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-60134). Refco, LLC, isa regulated commodity futures company that has businesses in theUnited States, London, Asia and Canada. Refco, LLC, filed forbankruptcy protection in order to consummate the sale ofsubstantially all of its assets to Man Financial Inc., a whollyowned subsidiary of Man Group plc. (Refco Bankruptcy News, IssueNo. 30; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)ROO GROUP: Posts $2.6 Mil. Net Loss in 2006 First Fiscal Quarter----------------------------------------------------------------ROO Group, Inc., filed its first quarter financial statements forthe three months ended March 31, 2006, with the Securities andExchange Commission on May 19, 2006.The Company reported a $2,647,000 net loss on $1,780,000 ofrevenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006.At March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed $8,875,000in total assets, $2,940,000 in total liabilities, $123,000 inminority interest, and $5,812,000 in stockholders' equity.Full-text copies of the Company's financial statements for thethree months ended March 31, 2006, are available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?9e6 Going Concern DoubtAs reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 29, 2006,Moore Stephens, P.C., in New York, raised substantial doubt aboutROO Group, Inc.'s ability to continue as a going concern afterauditing the Company's consolidated financial statements for theyear ended Dec. 31, 2005. The auditor pointed to the Company'srecurring losses and negative cash flows from operations.ROO Group, Inc. -- http://www.roo.com/-- is a global provider of digital media solutions and technology that enables theactivation, marketing and distribution of digital media videocontent over the Internet and emerging broadcasting platforms suchas set top boxes and wireless. ROO offers turnkey video solutionsfor businesses seeking to improve their web presence with videobroadcasts or broadcast their own latest video clips. ROO helpsbusiness advertise their latest offering with interactiveadvertising solutions, 15-30 second video commercials with alinked call to action and played simultaneously with topical videocontent in a television style format over the Internet.SAINT VINCENTS: Queens Hospital Sale Hearing Set for June 26------------------------------------------------------------As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on May 16, 2006,Saint Vincents Catholic Medical Centers of New York and itsdebtor-affiliates are seeking to sell Mary Immaculate Hospital andSt. John's Queen's Hospital located in Queens, New York, andcertain related assets.The Debtors have entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement withCaritas Health Care Planning, Inc., an affiliate of WyckoffHeights Medical Center for the sale of the Queens Hospitals andrelated assets, subject to higher or better offers receivedthrough a bidding process and auction.The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New Yorkwill convene a hearing on June 26, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., toconsider: (a) approval of the Sale of the Queens Assets to Caritas Health Care Planning, Inc., or other Successful Bidders; (b) the proposed assumption and assignment of the Assumed Contracts and Leases and related cure claims in connection with the Sale; and (c) any issues or objections that are timely interposed by any parties. ResponsesA) Patsy Merola & GAICPatsy Merola and Great American Insurance Company, as contingentsubrogee of Mr. Merola, complain that the Sale Motion failed to: (a) recognize the lien of the $2,652,538 judgment awarded in Mr. Merola's favor on October 9, 2003; (b) furnish Mr. Merola or GAIC \"adequate protection\" for the Sale free and clear of Mr. Merola's judgment lien; and (c) preserve their rights and positions.Accordingly, Mr. Merola and GAIC ask the Court to deny theDebtors' Proposed Sale unless they are furnished with adequateprotection.B) DASNYThe Dormitory Authority of the State of New York tells the Courtthat it has not provided its consent to the transfer of (i) theDebtors' interests in a parcel of land where which St. Dominic'sFamily Health Center Clinic was to be constructed and (ii) thelease agreements related to that property land.DASNY says it may approve and consent to the transfer of theLeased Property and the assumption and assignment of the St.Dominic's Lease Agreements if, among other things: (1) the Debtors and the Successful Bidder or Caritas Health Care secure the necessary regulatory approvals and assure DASNY that the St. Dominic's Family Health Center Clinic will remain a \"health facility\"; and (2) DASNY will have received and accepted an opinion of counsel that the Sale and the assumption of the Assumed Liabilities will not adversely affect the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Series 1996A Bonds for federal income tax purposes.DASNY reserves its right to object to the Proposed Sale on anygrounds and any proposed assumption or rejection of the St.Dominic's Lease Agreements.Accordingly, DASNY asks the Court to deny the Debtors' request asit relates to the Leased Property and the St. Dominic's LeaseAgreements absent its consent and approval.C) Primary CarePrimary Care Development Corporation seeks to: * confirm that its Operating Lease will be assumed by the Debtors and assigned to Caritas Health Care Planning, Inc.; * clarify that the Debtors' interest in the St. Dominic Facility will be transferred and assigned to Caritas Health Care; * confirm that any transfer and assignment will be subject to all of the Primary Care Liens; * confirm that the Primary Care Liens will not be primed in any manner; and * confirm that the Debtors and Caritas Health Care have taken all necessary steps to ensure that the tax exempt status of the St. Dominic Bonds is preserved and that all required approvals have been or will be obtained prior to closing.Accordingly, Primary Care asks the Court to condition the sale ofthe St. Dominic Facility and the assumption and assignment of theOperating Lease on the Debtors' agreement to incorporate each ofthe Clarifications into the final sale order.D) NYSNAThe New York State Nurses Association supports the Debtors'Propose Sale.However, Avrum J. Rosen, Esq., counsel for the NYSNA, notes thatthe Proposed Sale has provisions for the deletion of certainexecutory contracts at the election of the purchaser after theapproval of the transaction.Mr. Rosen states that under applicable law, the assets of theQueens Hospitals and related facilities cannot be sold free andclear of any collective bargaining agreement without compliancewith the dictates of Section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code.Mr. Rosen notes that the present Purchase Agreement complies withthe applicable law. Any attempt to modify or terminate a CBAunder the proposed sale must comply with Section 1113, Mr. Rosenasserts.Accordingly, the NYSNA asks the Court to approve the Sale incompliance with applicable law.E) Creditors CommitteeThe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors also supports theDebtors' Proposed Sale.The Committee reserves its rights to object to particularprovisions of the Purchase Agreement or terms of the ProposedSale at the sale hearing.The Committee also reserves its rights to assert its position asto the highest and best bid submitted and to assert theappropriate factors for the Court to use in ultimatelydetermining the highest and best bid. About Saint VincentsHeadquartered in New York, New York, Saint Vincents CatholicMedical Centers of New York -- http://www.svcmc.org/-- the largest Catholic healthcare providers in New York State, operatehospitals, health centers, nursing homes and a home health agency.The hospital group consists of seven hospitals located throughoutBrooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, and Staten Island, along with fournursing homes and a home health care agency. The Company and sixof its affiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on July 5, 2005(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-14945 through 05-14951). GaryRavert, Esq., and Stephen B. Selbst, Esq., at McDermott Will &Emery, LLP, filed the Debtors' chapter 11 cases. On Sept. 12,2005, John J. Rapisardi, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP tookover representing the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.Martin G. Bunin, Esq., at Thelen Reid & Priest LLP, represents theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. As of Apr. 30, 2005,the Debtors listed $972 million in total assets and $1 billion intotal debts. (Saint Vincent Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 26;Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)SAINT VINCENTS: Sets Up Staten Island Sale Bidding Guidelines-------------------------------------------------------------Saint Vincents Catholic Medical Centers of New York and itsdebtor-affiliates ask the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York to establish uniform bidding procedures forthe sale of St. Vincent's Hospital, Staten Island.The Debtors intend to value highly, bids that propose to continuethe acute care and other programs at St. Vincent's Hospital,Staten Island. Accordingly, the Debtors and Bayonne MedicalCenter Bayonne have agreed to Bidding Procedures, which willgovern the submission of bids for all or a portion of theHospital.George A. Davis, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, in NewYork, explains that to participate in the bidding process, abidder must first deliver to the Debtors an executedconfidentiality agreement, a written non-binding expression ofinterest, and thereafter a Qualified Bid.To be a Qualified Bid, a bid must: (a) be on the same terms and conditions as those in the Debtors' Purchase Agreement with Castleton Acquisition Corporation, an affiliate of Bayonne Medical Center Bayonne, and must include an agreement substantially similar to the Purchase Agreement; (b) include a purchase price that is greater than $28,500,000 if for all or substantially all of the Hospital's Assets; and (c) be accompanied by a deposit equal to at least $1,000,000.All bids must be received by 5:00 p.m. New York Time on June 30,2006.Where the assets covered by a competing bid include the Hospital,the Debtors will also consider the competing bid's impact on: * the continuation of the Hospital as an acute care facility, if possible; * the continuation of graduate medical education at the Hospital; * the Debtors' commitment to the operation of the Hospital in accordance with Catholic ethical and religious directives for the operation of a healthcare facility; and * the Debtors' ability to minimize their losses related to the Hospital prior to the Closing Date.The Debtors propose to hold an auction at 11:00 a.m. New YorkTime on July 10, 2006.The Auction will be held if one or more Qualified Bids ofsufficient value is received before the Bid Deadline.The Debtors also propose to publish a Notice of Auction and SaleHearing once in The Wall Street Journal (National Edition).Headquartered in New York, New York, Saint Vincents CatholicMedical Centers of New York -- http://www.svcmc.org/-- the largest Catholic healthcare providers in New York State, operatehospitals, health centers, nursing homes and a home health agency.The hospital group consists of seven hospitals located throughoutBrooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, and Staten Island, along with fournursing homes and a home health care agency. The Company and sixof its affiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on July 5, 2005(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-14945 through 05-14951). GaryRavert, Esq., and Stephen B. Selbst, Esq., at McDermott Will &Emery, LLP, filed the Debtors' chapter 11 cases. On Sept. 12,2005, John J. Rapisardi, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP tookover representing the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.Martin G. Bunin, Esq., at Thelen Reid & Priest LLP, represents theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. As of Apr. 30, 2005,the Debtors listed $972 million in total assets and $1 billion intotal debts. (Saint Vincent Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 26;Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)SAINT VINCENTS: Wants to Pay $375,000 Break-up Fee to Castleton---------------------------------------------------------------Saint Vincents Catholic Medical Centers of New York and itsdebtor-affiliates ask the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York to allow the payment of a $375,000 break-upfee and up to $375,000 expense reimbursement to CastletonAcquisition Corporation, an affiliate of Bayonne Medical CenterBayonne, in the event the Debtors sell St. Vincent's Hospital,Staten Island to another bidder.The Debtors contend that the Break-Up Fee and ExpenseReimbursement are reasonable in relation to the size of theproposed sale. Under the Debtors' Purchase Agreement withCastleton, the Break-Up Fee constitutes 1.4% of the totalconsideration to be provided to the Debtors and the ExpenseReimbursement constitutes, at most, 1.4% of total consideration.The Debtors do not believe that the Break-Up Fee and ExpenseReimbursement will have a \"chilling effect\" on other prospectivebidders' interest in the Staten Island Assets.The Break-Up Fee and Expense Reimbursement constitute actual andnecessary costs and expenses of preserving the Debtors' estateswithin the meaning of Section 503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Thus, the Debtors assert, the Break-Up Fee and ExpenseReimbursement should be treated as allowed administrative expenseclaims under Sections 503(b) and 507(a)(1) of the BankruptcyCode.Moreover, if the Debtors exercise their right to terminate thePurchase Agreement based on Castleton's inability to procureapproval of its Certificate of Need, and subsequently agree tosell the Hospital on terms substantially more favorable thanthose contained in their Purchase Agreement with Castleton withinsix months after termination, the Debtors will pay to Castleton a$125,000 fee upon the consummation of the alternative sale.Headquartered in New York, New York, Saint Vincents CatholicMedical Centers of New York -- http://www.svcmc.org/-- the largest Catholic healthcare providers in New York State, operatehospitals, health centers, nursing homes and a home health agency.The hospital group consists of seven hospitals located throughoutBrooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, and Staten Island, along with fournursing homes and a home health care agency. The Company and sixof its affiliates filed for chapter 11 protection on July 5, 2005(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 05-14945 through 05-14951). GaryRavert, Esq., and Stephen B. Selbst, Esq., at McDermott Will &Emery, LLP, filed the Debtors' chapter 11 cases. On Sept. 12,2005, John J. Rapisardi, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP tookover representing the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.Martin G. Bunin, Esq., at Thelen Reid & Priest LLP, represents theOfficial Committee of Unsecured Creditors. As of Apr. 30, 2005,the Debtors listed $972 million in total assets and $1 billion intotal debts. (Saint Vincent Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 26;Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)SENSOR SYSTEM: Weinberg & Company Raises Going Concern Doubt------------------------------------------------------------Weinberg & Company, P.A., in Boca Raton, Florida, raisedsubstantial doubt about Sensor System Solutions, Inc.'s ability tocontinue as a going concern after auditing the Company'sconsolidated financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31,2005. The auditor pointed to the Company's losses, negative cashflow from operations, and working capital and stockholders'deficiencies.The Company reported a $2,729,273 net loss on $1,324,872 of netsales for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005.At Dec. 31, 2005, the Company's balance sheet showed $1,089,951 intotal assets and $2,785,841 in total liabilities, resulting in a$1,695,890 stockholders' deficit.The Company's Dec. 31 balance sheet also showed strained liquiditywith $751,977 in total current assets available to pay $2,756,747in total current liabilities coming due within the next 12 months.A full-text copy of the Company's 2005 Annual Report is availablefor free at http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a15Sensor System Solutions, Inc., through Advanced Custom Sensors,Inc., designs and manufactures sensors and signal conditioningmodules. The Company offers a variety of digital pressure gauges,pressure transducers, pressure sensors, force beams, load cells,intelligent sensor interface electronics, intelligent embeddedcontrol systems, and wireless communication network interfaces.The Company also supplies thin-film and micro-machined force andpressure sensors to the medical, chemical, oil, and gasindustries.SERACARE LIFE: Can Use Cash Collateral on Interim Basis-------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Louise DeCarl Adler of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Southern District of California allowed SeraCare LifeSciences, Inc., on an interim basis, to use cash collateralsecuring repayment of its secured prepetition loan to Union Bankof California and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.The Debtor can use the cash collateral from May 27, 2006, throughJune 16, 2006, to pay the Debtor's operating expenses. TheDebtors will also pay senior secured lenders $5 million asprincipal payment from the cash collateral. Principal payments tothe senior secured lenders will be paid, in cash, on these dates: 6/1/06 -- $5 million (to be paid during the interim period) 7/1/06 -- $2 million 8/1/06 -- $1 million 9/1/06 -- the remaining principal and interest on the Term Loan (approximately $1 million)The Debtor sought authority to use the cash collateral untilSept. 15, 2006. The Court will consider approval of that requeston a final basis on June 15, 2006, at 2:30 p.m. Any objectionsmust be filed and served by the close of business on June 5, 2006.The secured lenders will retain their existing liens against thecash collateral, and its proceeds. In addition, the securedlenders are granted a fully perfected replacement lien on assetsof the estate that is coextensive with, and limited by, the scopeand priority of their existing lien rights.Based in Oceanside, California, SeraCare Life Sciences, Inc. --http://www.seracare.com/-- develops and manufactures biological based materials and services for diagnostic tests, commercialbioproduction of therapeutic drugs, and medical research. TheCompany filed for chapter 11 protection on March 22, 2006(Bankr. S.D. Calif. Case No. 06-00510). The Official Committee ofUnsecured Creditors selected Henry C. Kevane, Esq., and Maxim B.Litvak, Esq., at Pachulski Stang Ziehl Young Jones & WeintraubLLP, as its counsel. When the Debtor filed for protection fromits creditors, it listed $119.2 million in assets and$33.5 million in debts.SIERRA HEALTH: Earns $32.7 Million in 2006 First Fiscal Quarter---------------------------------------------------------------Sierra Health Services Inc. earned $32.7 million of net income on$438.2 million of net revenues for the first quarter ended March31, 2006, compared to $29.4 million of net income on $335.9million of net revenues for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005.As of March 31, 2006, the Company's balance sheet showed totalassets of $767.4 million and total debts of $527.5 million.A full-text copy of Sierra Health's Quarterly Report is availablefor free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a21Headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, Sierra Health Services Inc. -- http://www.sierrahealth.com/-- is a diversified health care services company that operates health maintenance organizations,indemnity insurers, military health programs, preferred providerorganizations and multispecialty medical groups. Sierra'ssubsidiaries serve more than 1.2 million people through healthbenefit plans for employers, government programs and individuals. * * *Moody's Investors Service rates Sierra Health Services Inc.'spreferred stock at Ba1.SILICON GRAPHICS: Can Continue Workers' Compensation Program------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New Yorkgrants Silicon Graphics, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates' requestto continue their Insurance Programs uninterrupted and to honortheir undisputed prepetition obligations relating to the InsurancePrograms, on an interim basis, except as otherwise provided.The Court also permits their Banks to receive, honor, process, andpay all checks drawn, or electronic fund transfers requested or tobe requested fund transfers on the Debtors' general disbursementaccounts to the extent that the checks or electronic fundtransfers relate to any of their obligations arising from theInsurance Programs.Judge Gropper permits, but does not require, the Debtors to pay,in their sole discretion, all obligations arising under theInsurance Programs, including those Insurance Obligations that: (i) were due and payable or related to the period before the Petition Date for up to $509,000; and (ii) are or become due and payable or related to the period after the Petition Date.On a final basis, the Court authorizes: (a) the Debtors' employees who hold claims under the Workers' Compensation Programs, at the Debtors' direction, to proceed with their workers' compensation claims in the appropriate judicial or administrative forum; and (b) the Debtors to pay the outstanding premium under the Debtors' cargo and transit insurance policy maintained with Lloyds of London for $4,300.As of April 28, 2006, Silicon Graphics, Inc., had 1,858 employees,consisting of 1,237 employees in the United States and 621employees abroad.According to Gary T. Holtzer, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & MangesLLP, in New York, the Debtors maintain a workers' compensationprogram and various liability, product, property, directors' andofficers' liability, and other insurance programs through severaldifferent insurance carriers.A list of the Debtors' Insurance Programs is available for free athttp://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a28Mr. Holtzer relates that, as part of their cash management system,the Debtors draw on funds in their accounts at certain banks andfinancial institutions to satisfy their obligations arising fromthe Insurance Programs.The Debtors estimate that their outstanding prepetition InsuranceObligations aggregate to no more than approximately $509,000.A. Workers' Compensation Program The Debtors currently maintain their Workers' Compensation Program with the National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania -- covering claims asserted solely by their U.S.-based employees. The Debtors pay to National Union an annual premium that is calculated based on the Debtors' projected payroll and historic loss rates. The Workers' Compensation Premium is approximately $434,104 for the period July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006. The Debtors paid approximately $301,627 in respect of Workers' Compensation Deductibles for the period July 1, 2004, to June 30, 2005. As of the Petition Date, the Debtors do not believe they have any outstanding liability on account of 11 open workers' compensation claims. Notwithstanding, the Debtors provided to National Union a $829,000 cash deposit, against which National Union has debited any Workers' Compensation Deductibles, as well as any claim amounts in excess of the Workers' Compensation Cap. As of the Petition Date, approximately $540,000 remains as cash deposit in favor of National Union to cover the Debtors' obligations for workers' compensation claims.B. Liability, Product and Property Insurance Programs The Debtors also maintain various liability-, product- and property-related insurance programs, which provide the Debtors with insurance coverage for liabilities relating to, among other things: * personal injuries; * crime, including employee theft; * officers' and directors' liability; * transportation and storage of cargo; and * umbrella and various other product- and property-related general liabilities. Annual Insurance Premiums for the Liability, Product and Property Insurance Programs aggregate approximately $4,230,920, which the Debtors finance through AFCO, a Mellon Financial Company. As of the Petition Date, the Debtors believe that all Insurance Premiums have been fully paid. The Debtors estimate that no more than $330,000 is currently owed for Insurance Deductibles relating to prepetition claims.C. Insurance Brokers The Debtors employ Marsh, Inc., and Willis Insurance Service as insurance brokers to assist them with the procurement and negotiation of their Insurance Programs. As of the Petition Date, the Debtors believe that they owe approximately $179,000 to Marsh in Broker Fees, and that no amounts remain unpaid to Willis for prepetition services.According to Mr. Holtzer, the nonpayment of any premiums,deductibles, or related fees under one of the Insurance Programscould result in one or more of the Insurance Carriers declining torenew their insurance policies or refusing to enter into newinsurance agreements with the Debtors in the future. \"If theInsurance Programs are allowed to lapse without renewal, theDebtors could be exposed to substantial liability for damagesresulting to persons and property of the Debtors and others, whichexposure could have an extremely negative impact on the Debtors'ability to successfully reorganize.\" Furthermore, Mr. Holtzercontinues, the Debtors would then be required to obtainreplacement policies on an expedited basis at a significant costto the estates.Headquartered in Mountain View, California, Silicon Graphics, Inc.(OTC: SGID) -- http://www.sgi.com/-- offers high-performance computing. SGI helps customers solve their computing challenges,whether it's sharing images to aid in brain surgery, finding oilmore efficiently, studying global climate, providing technologiesfor homeland security and defense, enabling the transition fromanalog to digital broadcasting, or helping enterprises managelarge data. The Debtor and 13 of its affiliates filed for chapter11 protection on May 8, 2006 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case Nos. 06-10977through 06-10990). Gary Holtzer, Esq., and Shai Y. Waisman, Esq.,at Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, represent the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts. When the Debtors filed for protection fromtheir creditors, they listed total assets of $369,416,815 andtotal debts of $664,268,602. (Silicon Graphics Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 4; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)SILICON GRAPHICS: Wants to Hire Ordinary Course Professionals-------------------------------------------------------------Silicon Graphics, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates ask the U.S.Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York forauthority to continue employing and paying ordinary courseprofessionals, without having to file separate employmentapplications and affidavits.The Debtors retain the services of various attorneys, accountants,and other professionals in the ordinary course of their businessoperations, unrelated to their Chapter 11 cases, including generalcorporate, accounting, auditing, tax, and litigation matters.A list of the Debtors' ordinary course professionals is availablefor free at http://researcharchives.com/t/s?a0aAccording to Gary Holtzer, Esq., at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, inNew York, the Debtors will continue to require the services of theOCPs to enable them to continue normal business activities thatare essential to their stabilization and reorganization efforts.The Debtors' request will save the estates the substantialexpenses associated with applying separately for the employment ofeach OCP. Furthermore, it will avoid the incurrence of additionalfees relating to the preparation and prosecution of interim feeapplications.The Debtors propose to pay each OCP 100% of the fees anddisbursements incurred, on their approval of an appropriateinvoice. The payment is capped at the lesser of $35,000 per monthper OCP or $350,000 per month for all OCPs.If any amount owed for an OCP's fees and disbursements exceeds$45,000 per month on a rolling basis, then the payments for thoseexcess amounts will be subject to the Court's approval.Each OCP is required to serve on the Debtors' bankruptcy counsel: a) an affidavit certifying that the OCP does not represent or hold any interest adverse to the Debtors or their estates with respect to the matter on which the OCP is to be employed; and b) a completed retention questionnaire.The Debtors' attorneys will then file the OCP Affidavit and theRetention Questionnaire with the Court and serve copies on theU.S. Trustee.No OCP will be paid for invoiced fees and expense reimbursementuntil its OCP Affidavit and its Retention Questionnaire have beenfiled with the Court.Mr. Holtzer relates that although the Debtors have diligentlyattempted to identify all of their current OCPs, some OCPs mayhave been omitted inadvertently and some may cease providingservices to the Debtors during the course of their chapter 11cases. Moreover, the nature of the Debtors' businesses mayrequire the retention of additional OCPs from time to time.Although certain of the OCPs may hold unsecured claims against theDebtors for prepetition services rendered, the Debtors do notbelieve that any of the OCPs have an interest adverse to theDebtors, their creditors, or other parties-in-interest on thematters for which they would be employed, Mr. Holtzer maintains.Headquartered in Mountain View, California, Silicon Graphics, Inc.(OTC: SGID) -- http://www.sgi.com/-- offers high-performance computing. SGI helps customers solve their computing challenges,whether it's sharing images to aid in brain surgery, finding oilmore efficiently, studying global climate, providing technologiesfor homeland security and defense, enabling the transition fromanalog to digital broadcasting, or helping enterprises managelarge data. The Debtor and 13 of its affiliates filed for chapter11 protection on May 8, 2006 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case Nos. 06-10977through 06-10990). Gary Holtzer, Esq., and Shai Y. Waisman, Esq.,at Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, represent the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts. When the Debtors filed for protection fromtheir creditors, they listed total assets of $369,416,815 andtotal debts of $664,268,602. (Silicon Graphics Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 4; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)SILICON GRAPHICS: Seeks Court Nod for Compensation Procedures-------------------------------------------------------------Pursuant to Sections 105(a) and 331 of the Bankruptcy Code,Silicon Graphics, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates ask Judge AllanL. Gropper of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern Districtof New York to establish uniform procedures for the payment andreimbursement of various court-approved professionals on a monthlybasis, on terms comparable to procedures established in otherlarge Chapter 11 cases.The Debtors propose that: (a) Each Professional seeking payment will serve a monthly statement, on or before the 30th day of each month after the month payment is sought, on: * Silicon Graphics, Inc., * Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, * the attorneys for the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors; and * the Office of the United States Trustee. (b) The monthly statement does not need to be filed with the Court and a copy does not have to be delivered to the presiding bankruptcy judge's chambers. (c) For Professionals who bill based on time, each monthly fee statement must contain a list of the individuals who provided services during the statement period, their billing rates, the aggregate hours spent, a reasonably detailed breakdown of the disbursements incurred and contemporaneously maintained time entries. (d) The Notice Parties will have 15 days to review a statement. If a Party objects to the payment or reimbursement, it must, by no later than 35 days after the end of the month for which compensation is sought, serve a written notice of objection containing the nature of the objection, upon: * the Professional whose statement is objected to; and * the Notice Parties. (e) At the expiration of the 35-day period, and in the absence of objection, the Debtors will promptly pay 80% of the undisputed fees and 100% of the undisputed expenses in each monthly statement. (f) If the Debtors receive an objection to a fee statement, they will withhold payment on that objected portion of the fee statement and promptly pay the remainder of the fees and disbursements. (g) If the parties to an objection are able to resolve their dispute, then the Debtors will promptly pay that portion of the fee statement, which is no longer subject to an objection. (h) All unresolved objections will be preserved and presented to the Court at the next interim or final fee application hearing. (i) An objection will not prejudice the objecting party's right to object to any fee application made to the Court in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code on any ground. (j) Every 120 days, but no more than every 150 days, each of the Professionals will serve and file an application for interim or final Court approval and allowance of the compensation and reimbursement of expenses requested. (k) At least 30 days prior to the fee application hearing, the Debtors' attorneys will notify the Court, the U.S. Trustee and all retained professionals, of the time, date and location of the fee hearing, the period covered by the fee applications, and the objection deadline. (l) Any Professional who fails to file an application seeking approval of compensation and expenses previously paid when due: * will be ineligible to receive further monthly payments of fees until further Court order; and * may be required to disgorge any fees paid since the retention or the last fee application, whichever is later. (m) The pendency of an application or a Court order that payment of compensation or reimbursement of expenses was improper as to a particular statement will not disqualify a Professional from the future payment of compensation or reimbursement of expenses. (n) Neither the payment of, nor the failure to pay, monthly compensation and reimbursement will have any effect on the Court's interim or final allowance of compensation and reimbursement of any Professional. (o) The attorneys for the Creditors Committee may collect and submit statements of expenses, with supporting evidence of payment, from members of the Committee the person represents. However, the Committee attorneys must ensure that the reimbursement requests comply with the Court's Administrative Orders dated June 24, 1991, and April 21, 1995.According to the Debtors, the proposed procedures will enable themto closely monitor the costs of administration, maintain a levelcash flow availability, and implement efficient cash managementprocedures. Moreover, the procedures will allow the Court and keyparties-in-interest to ensure the reasonableness and necessity ofthe compensation and reimbursement sought.Headquartered in Mountain View, California, Silicon Graphics, Inc.(OTC: SGID) -- http://www.sgi.com/-- offers high-performance computing. SGI helps customers solve their computing challenges,whether it's sharing images to aid in brain surgery, finding oilmore efficiently, studying global climate, providing technologiesfor homeland security and defense, enabling the transition fromanalog to digital broadcasting, or helping enterprises managelarge data. The Debtor and 13 of its affiliates filed for chapter11 protection on May 8, 2006 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case Nos. 06-10977through 06-10990). Gary Holtzer, Esq., and Shai Y. Waisman, Esq.,at Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, represent the Debtors in theirrestructuring efforts. When the Debtors filed for protection fromtheir creditors, they listed total assets of $369,416,815 andtotal debts of $664,268,602. (Silicon Graphics Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 4; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)TRANSAX INTERNATIONAL: Auditor Raises Going Concern Doubt---------------------------------------------------------Moore Stephens, P.C., in New York, raised substantial doubt aboutTransax International Limited's ability to continue as a goingconcern after auditing the Company's consolidated financialstatements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005. The auditor pointedto the Company's losses, and working capital and stockholders'deficiencies.The Company reported a $637,919 net loss on $3,380,150 of revenuesfor the year ended Dec. 31, 2005.At Dec. 31, 2005, the Company's balance sheet showed $1,669,742 intotal assets and $3,185,120 in total liabilities, resulting in a$1,515,378 stockholders' deficit.The Company's Dec. 31 balance sheet also showed strained liquiditywith $494,244 in total current assets available to pay $2,563,200in total current liabilities coming due within the next 12 months.A full-text copy of the Company's 2005 Annual Report is availablefor free http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?a11Based in Miami, Florida, Transax International Limited (OTCBB:TNSX) -- http://www.transax.com/-- provides hospitals, physicians and health insurance companies with innovative health informationmanagement systems to manage coding, compliance, abstracting andrecord management's processes. The Company's subsidiaries are:TDS Telecommunication Data Systems LTDA provides those services inBrazil; Transax Australia Pty Ltd. provides those services inAustralia; and Medlink Technologies, Inc., initiates research anddevelopment.USA COMMERCIAL: U.S. Trustee Names 7-Member Contract Rights Panel-----------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Trustee for Region 17 appointed seven members to serve onan the Official Committee of Holders of Executory Contract Rightsin USA Commercial Mortgage Company and its debtor-affiliates'chapter 11 cases: 1. William J. Bullard Fertitta Enterprises, Inc. P.O. Box 27555 Las Vegas, Nevada 89126-1555 Tel: (702) 221-4715 Fax: (702) 362-5889 2. Helms Homes, LLC Terry Helms 809 Upland Boulevard Las Vegas, Nevada 89107 Tel: (702) 258-1044 Fax: (702) 258-0403 3. Terry R. Helms Living Trust 11/94 Terry Helms 809 Upland Boulevard Las Vegas, Nevada 89107 Tel: (702) 258-1044 Fax: (702) 258-0403 4. Homfeld II, LLC Edward W. Homfeld 858 Bishop Road Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan 48230 Tel: (954) 560-7709 Fax: (734) 827-7743 5. Arthur Polacheck 2056 Woodlake Circle Deerfield Beach, Florida 33442 Tel: (954) 650-8768 Fax: (561) 417-6620 6. Dennis Flier, Inc. Defined Benefit Trust Dated 6/29/87 Dennis Flier 20155 Porto Vita Way, # 1803 Aventura, Florida 33180 Tel: (305) 792-9601 Fax: (305) 792-9602 7. Jim McCollum 1011 F Avenue Coronado, California 92118 Tel: (619) 890-5125The Official Committee of Holders Of Executory Contract Rightsthrough USA Commercial Mortgage Company, along with the OfficialCommittee of Equity Security Holders in USA Capital DiversifiedTrust Deed Fund, LLC, and the Official Committee of EquitySecurity Holders of USA Capital First Trust Deed Fund, LLC, hasretained Stutman, Treister & Glatt, P.C., as their specialbankruptcy counsel for all matters of common interest.Based in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA Commercial Mortgage Company, dbaUSA Capital -- http://www.usacapitalcorp.com/-- provides more than $1 billion in short-term and permanent financing tohomebuilders, commercial developers, apartment owners andinstitutions nationwide. The Company and its debtor-affiliatesfiled for chapter 11 protection on April 13, 2006 (Bankr. D. Nev.Case Nos. 06-10725 to 06-10729). Lenard E. Schwartzer, Esq., atSchwartzer & Mcpherson Law Firm, represents the Debtors. When theDebtors filed for protection from their creditors, they estimatedassets of more than $100 million and debts between $10 million and$50 million.USG CORP: Settles CCR, et al., Performance Bond Dispute for $13MM-----------------------------------------------------------------USG Corporation, its debtor-affiliates, Center for ClaimsResolution, Inc., and Safeco Insurance Company of America agreedto resolve their disputes, following extensive arm's-lengthnegotiations.As previously reported, USG Corporation and United States GypsumCompany filed an adversary complaint in the Bankruptcy Court onNovember 30, 2001, captioned \"USG Corporation and United StatesGypsum Company v. Center for Claims Resolution, Inc., and SafecoInsurance Company of America,\" Case No. 01-08932.The Debtors sought to enjoin the CCR from drawing on a$60,277,000 performance bond and enjoin Safeco from paying on theBond during the pendency of the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases.To date, no final judgment has been entered in the CCRLitigation. CCR Member Claims LitigationPaul Heath, Esq., at Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., inWilmington, Delaware, recounts that the CCR has filed Claim No.6505 against U.S. Gypsum in an amount in excess of $104,000,000.Certain CCR members have also filed these proofs of claim againstU.S. Gypsum, each asserting $100,000,000: Claimant Claim No. -------- --------- Certain Teed Corporation 6399 Dana Corporation 6647 I.U. North America 6412 Maremont Corporation 6529 Nosroe Corp. 6415 Union Carbide Corporation and Amchem Products, Inc. 6634 National Service Industries, Inc. -The CCR and the CCR Members generally sought damages from U.S.Gypsum for, among other things, settlement payments that weremade, or that may have to be made to asbestos personal injuryplaintiffs on U.S Gypsum's behalf.The Debtors subsequently sought to disallow the CCR Claim andmost of the CCR Member Claims on the basis that most of theclaims related to settlements not consummated as of the PetitionDate, or were contingent claims for contribution or reimbursementshould be disallowed pursuant to Section 502(e)(1)(B) of theBankruptcy Code.The CCR and the CCR Members responded to the Debtors' omnibusclaims objection in July 2005, and asserted that the claims werefor contract damages and should be classified as Class 6 GeneralUnsecured Claims under the Debtors' joint plan of reorganization,which provides that any claims of the CCR and the CCR Members arechanneled to the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust.The Debtors' Claims Objection is currently pending in theBankruptcy Court. $13,000,000 CCR Settlement AgreementThe salient terms of the parties' Settlement Agreement are: (1) In full and complete satisfaction of the CCR Claim, the CCR Member Claims and certain other claims as provided in the Settlement Agreement, within 10 business days after the Plan's effective date, the Debtors will: (a) pay $13,000,000 to the CCR; and (b) deposit $3,500,000 into an interest bearing escrow account -- Holdback Amount. However, the CCR Parties remain free to assert against the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust any asbestos personal injury claims that they have acquired or may acquire in the future by assignment. The date on which the Debtors complete the $13,000,000 payment and deposit the Holdback Amount will be deemed the \"Settlement Payment Date.\" (2) The Debtors will file with the Bankruptcy Court not later than June 23, 2006, either: * a motion or objection seeking a court order that all claims filed by any current or former CCR member companies against the Debtors will be treated exclusively as Asbestos PI Claims under the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust or will be disallowed; or * a stipulation providing for a claim treatment or disallowance. No later than 10 business days after the entry of a final order with respect to the Channeling Objections, the Debtors will pay to the CCR the Holdback Amount less the amount of any distributions on account of any allowed Other CCR Members Claims that are not channeled to the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust. (3) On the Settlement Payment Date, the Bond will be deemed cancelled, and Safeco will have no further obligations under the Bond. At that time, the CCR will take all actions as may be reasonably requested by Safeco to evidence the Bond cancellation, including, without limitation, a return of the original Bond to Safeco within 15 days of the Settlement Payment Date. (4) On the Settlement Payment Date or as soon as practicable: (i) the parties to the CCR Litigation will dismiss with prejudice any and all claims asserted; and (ii) the CCR Claims Litigation will be dismissed with prejudice as to the CCR Parties, provided that the CCR Parties remain free to assert against the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust any Asbestos PI Claims and that the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust remains free to object to any claim and assert any defense of the Debtors. (5) The CCR Parties will fully support the Plan and will not file or cause any other party to file objections to or otherwise oppose the Plan, including the Asbestos Personal Injury Trust Distribution Procedures, in any manner. (6) On the Settlement Payment Date, the parties will exchange mutual releases of the Settled Claims and any and all claims related, directly or indirectly, to the CCR, their membership in the CCR, the Producer Agreement, and the Member Agreement of any Asbestos PI Claim against the Debtors and their estates. Deal Paves Way to Consensual Plan ConfirmationMr. Heath asserts that absent the Settlement Agreement, theoutcome of the CCR Litigation and the CCR Claims Litigation isuncertain.\"Although the Debtors believe that they have a strong case withrespect to the claims and defenses they have asserted against theCCR Parties, there is no guarantee that the results of theLitigation will prove favorable to the Debtors upon thecompletion of a trial and any appeals,\" Mr. Heath tells JudgeFitzgerald. \"The issues raised in the Litigation are complex andfact-intensive, and it is impossible to predict with certaintyhow a court ultimately would rule.\"As a result, Mr. Heath avers, there is no assurance that theultimate outcome of continuing the Litigation will be any morefavorable that the proposed treatment under the SettlementAgreement.Accordingly, the Debtors ask Judge Fitzgerald to approve the CCRSettlement Agreement.Mr. Heath contends that satisfaction of the CCR Claim and the CCRMember Claims pursuant to the Settlement Agreement saves theDebtors from the time, expense and distraction of certainappeals. If the Settlement Agreement is not approved, theDebtors will be required to continue the Litigation and disputethe merits of any confirmation objections raised by the CCRParties.Mr. Heath maintains that approval of the Settlement Agreementwill resolve all claims against the Debtors and will eliminateany potential objections to the Plan from the CCR Parties, thus,removing a significant obstacle to a consensual Planconfirmation. About USG Corp.Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, USG Corporation --http://www.usg.com/-- through its subsidiaries, is a leading manufacturer and distributor of building materials producing awide range of products for use in new residential, newnonresidential and repair and remodel construction, as well asproducts used in certain industrial processes.The Company filed for chapter 11 protection on June 25, 2001(Bankr. Del. Case No. 01-02094). David G. Heiman, Esq., GusKallergis, Esq., Brad B. Erens, Esq., Michelle M. Harner, Esq.,Mark A. Cody, Esq., and Daniel B. Prieto, Esq., at Jones Dayrepresent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.Lewis Kruger, Esq., Kenneth Pasquale, Esq., and Denise Wildes,Esq., represent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., and peter Van N. Lockwood, Esq., at Caplin& Drysdale, Chartered, represent the Official Committee ofAsbestos Personal Injury Claimants. Martin J. Bienenstock, Esq.,Judy G. Z. Liu, Esq., Ralph I. Miller, Esq., and David A.Hickerson, Esq., at Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP represent theStatutory Committee of Equity Security Holders. Dean M. Trafeletis the Future Claimants Representative. Michael J. Crames, Esq.,and Andrew A. Kress, Esq., at Kaye Scholer, LLP, represent theFuture Claimants Representative. Scott Baena, Esq., and JaySakalo, Esq., at Bilzen Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod LLP,represent the Asbestos Property Damage Claimants Committee.When the Debtors filed for protection from their creditors, theylisted $3,252,000,000 in assets and $2,739,000,000 in debts.(USG Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 111; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)USG CORP: Illinois Revenue Dept. Demands $2.49MM in Tax Payments----------------------------------------------------------------Kevin Harlowe, on behalf of the Department of Revenue of theState of Illinois, asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Districtof Delaware to compel Debtor U.S.G. Interiors to pay taxes and anyinterest or penalty due under the Illinois Revised Statutes.U.S.G. Interiors owes Illinois Revenue $2,491,873 in taxes as ofApril 20, 2006, consisting of various tax obligations withrespect to these tax periods: Accrued Accrued Balance Tax Period Tax Due Interest Penalty Due ---------- ------- -------- ------- ------- Jun 2002 $568,497 $252,016 - $820,513 Nov 2003 800,581 112,798 - 913,379 Sept 2004 480,327 32,935 $96,066 609,328 Oct 2004 50,246 2,536 10,049 62,831 Nov 2004 63,174 2,985 12,635 78,794 Feb 2006 6,876 16 136 7,028Mr. Harlowe asserts that the tax obligations are administrativeclaims against U.S.G. Interiors' estate. About USG Corp.Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, USG Corporation --http://www.usg.com/-- through its subsidiaries, is a leading manufacturer and distributor of building materials producing awide range of products for use in new residential, newnonresidential and repair and remodel construction, as well asproducts used in certain industrial processes.The Company filed for chapter 11 protection on June 25, 2001(Bankr. Del. Case No. 01-02094). David G. Heiman, Esq., GusKallergis, Esq., Brad B. Erens, Esq., Michelle M. Harner, Esq.,Mark A. Cody, Esq., and Daniel B. Prieto, Esq., at Jones Dayrepresent the Debtors in their restructuring efforts.Lewis Kruger, Esq., Kenneth Pasquale, Esq., and Denise Wildes,Esq., represent the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.Elihu Inselbuch, Esq., and peter Van N. Lockwood, Esq., at Caplin& Drysdale, Chartered, represent the Official Committee ofAsbestos Personal Injury Claimants. Martin J. Bienenstock, Esq.,Judy G. Z. Liu, Esq., Ralph I. Miller, Esq., and David A.Hickerson, Esq., at Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP represent theStatutory Committee of Equity Security Holders. Dean M. Trafeletis the Future Claimants Representative. Michael J. Crames, Esq.,and Andrew A. Kress, Esq., at Kaye Scholer, LLP, represent theFuture Claimants Representative. Scott Baena, Esq., and JaySakalo, Esq., at Bilzen Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod LLP,represent the Asbestos Property Damage Claimants Committee.When the Debtors filed for protection from their creditors, theylisted $3,252,000,000 in assets and $2,739,000,000 in debts.(USG Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 110; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)VARIG S.A.: Mitsui Says U.S. Court Protection is Inappropriate--------------------------------------------------------------Mitsui & Co. Ltd., as representative lessor with respect to twoBoeing 737-300, asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the SouthernDistrict of New York to: a. allow the preliminary injunction to expire; b. deny the request for a permanent injunction; and c. direct VARIG, S.A., and its debtor-affiliates to return the Aircraft to Mitsui, together with the engines and records. Mitsui's ComplaintVARIG has again defaulted on its obligations to Mitsui, WilliamJ. Rochelle, Esq., at Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., in New York,relates. Mitsui served the airline with notices of default,which VARIG has chosen to ignore. VARIG has not returned theAircraft and Mitsui believes both are in service generatingrevenue for the airline.At an April 27, 2006 hearing to consider an extension of thepreliminary injunction, UBS Investment Bank, VARIG's financialadvisor, told the U.S. Bankruptcy Court that VARIG had a proposalin hand from MatlinPatterson -- Plan A -- and another alternativeplan -- Plan B. The financial advisor explained that Plan A wasvastly preferable and could be implemented more quickly than PlanB.However, Mr. Rochelle says, no later than April 28, 2006, VARIGabandoned Plan A and instead adopted Plan B, which has itselfbeen modified since.Plan A's immediate repudiation, Mitsui asserts, implies that thefinancial advisor was either grossly unaware of unfolding eventsor had intentionally misled the Court in the testimony.Plan B entails spinning off VARIG's operations into a newcompany, not liable for its \"old\" debts, and assumes that a buyerwill pay not less than $870,000,000, for the airline's assets.Mr. Rochelle also notes that Plan B contemplates that theBrazilian government's Banco Nacional de DesenvolvimentoEconomico e Social will finance two-thirds of a bridge loan for$250,000,000 to provide liquidity until Plan B can beconsummated. BNDES will finance the bridge loan to a credit-worthy borrower who intends to buy VARIG's assets.Mitsui is skeptical that events will unfold as VARIG planned.Lessors deserve more than promises, Mitsui asserts.\"The time has come for the Bankruptcy Court to restore a modicumof sanity to the VARIG reorganization by compelling [it] eitherto pay the arrears immediately or surrender the aircraftimmediately,\" Mr. Rochelle says.VARIG, Mr. Rochelle points out, is once again four months inarrears to Mitsui and offers no guarantee that the defaulted rentwill be paid on a specific date.Mitsui is no longer willing for VARIG to continue using andwithholding the Aircraft while paying Mitsui nothing in return,Mr. Rochelle continues. Although VARIG promised that thefinancial problems had been cured and that no new defaults wouldoccur, the airline is again unilaterally turning lessors intoinvoluntary lenders funding round two in the airline'sreorganization.\"This Court should allow the existing preliminary injunction toexpire because giving the appearance of U.S. Court protection isinappropriate when the Brazilian reorganization has failed andneither the Brazilian government nor a private party is willingto step forward with the cash to compensate the lessors for theuse of their aircraft,\" Mr. Rochelle maintains. Conversion Hearing Set on May 31As previously reported, the Court extended the PreliminaryInjunction through and including June 1, 2006.The Court will convene a hearing on May 31, 2006, at 10:00 a.m.,to consider the Permanent Injunction request.On or before the May 31 hearing, the Court may, upon request of alessor, determine whether to order the implementation of theContingency Plan for the Orderly Return of Aircraft with respectto and to the extent of: a. any aircraft, engines or other equipment -- including parts -- that is property of a lessor that is or is proposed to be sold, assigned or otherwise transferred by a Foreign Debtor to a third party without the lessor's consent; or b. any aircraft or engine that is retained by a Foreign Debtor that is the property of a lessor where the Foreign Debtor is in default, under the lease for that aircraft or engine, for nonpayment of rent or maintenance reserves first coming due after June 17, 2005, and not cured on or before January 13, 2006, regardless of whether the cure was timely under the terms of the lessor's lease or other agreement.In view of developments in the Foreign Proceedings, EduardoZerwes, the Foreign Representative of VARIG, has advised theCourt that he will file a supplement to the Permanent Injunctionrequest on or before May 25, 2006. About VARIGHeadquartered in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, VARIG S.A. is Brazil'slargest air carrier and the largest air carrier in Latin America.VARIG's principal business is the transportation of passengers andcargo by air on domestic routes within Brazil and on internationalroutes between Brazil and North and South America, Europe andAsia. VARIG carries approximately 13 million passengers annuallyand employs approximately 11,456 full-time employees, of whichapproximately 133 are employed in the United States.The Company, along with two affiliates, filed for a judicialreorganization proceeding under the New Bankruptcy andRestructuring Law of Brazil on June 17, 2005, due to a competitivelandscape, high fuel costs, cash flow deficit, and high operatingleverage. The Debtors may be the first case under the new law,which took effect on June 9, 2005. Similar to a chapter 11debtor-in-possession under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the Debtorsremain in possession and control of their estate pending theJudicial Reorganization. Sergio Bermudes, Esq., at Escritorio deAdvocacia Sergio Bermudes, represents the carrier in Brazil.Each of the Debtors' Boards of Directors authorized Vicente Cervoas foreign representative. In this capacity, Mr. Cervo filed aSec. 304 petition on June 17, 2005 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case Nos.05-14400 and 05-14402). Rick B. Antonoff, Esq., at PillsburyWinthrop Shaw Pittman LLP represents Mr. Cervo in the UnitedStates. As of March 31, 2005, the Debtors reportedBRL2,979,309,000 in total assets and BRL9,474,930,000 in totaldebts. (VARIG Bankruptcy News, Issue No. 19; Bankruptcy Creditors'Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)VERILINK CORP: Court Okays William Gibbons as Local Bankr. Counsel------------------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Jack Caddell of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for theNorthern District of Alabama in Decatur gave Verilink Corporationand its debtor-affiliate Larscom, Inc., authority to employWilliam J. Gibbons, Jr., Esq., of Gibbons & Furman, P.C., as theirlocal bankruptcy counsel.Mr. Gibbons will: -- appear before the Bankruptcy Court; -- negotiate and formulate a chapter 11 plan; and -- perform other necessary legal services.The Debtors assured the Court that Mr. Gibbons will not duplicatethe services of Powell Goldstein LLP.Mr. Gibbons will charge $250 per hour for this engagement.Mr. Gibbons assures the Court that he does not hold or representan interest adverse to the Debtor or its estate and isdisinterested as that term is defined in Section 101(14) of theBankruptcy Code.Mr. Gibbons can be contacted at: William J. Gibbons, Esq. Gibbons & Furman, P.C. 117 Jefferson Street, North Huntsville, AL 35801Headquartered in Hunstville, Alabama, Verilink Corporation --http://www.verilink.com/-- is a leading provider of next- generation broadband access solutions for today's and tomorrow'snetworks. The Company develops, manufactures and markets a broadsuite of products that enable carriers and enterprises to buildconverged access networks to cost-effectively deliver next-generation communications services to their end customers. TheCompany and its debtor-affiliate, Larscom Inc., filed for chapter11 protection on April 9, 2006 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. Case No. 06-80566& 06-80567). Robert McCay Dearing Mercer, Esq., at PowellGoldstein LLP, represents the Debtors. Darryl S. Laddin, Esq., atArnall Golden Gregory LLP and Jayna Partain Lamar, Esq., atMaynard, Cooper & Gale, P.C., give legal advice to the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they listed total assets of$37,221,000 and total debts of $23,913,000.VERILINK CORP: Bankruptcy Administrator Appoints 7-Member Panel---------------------------------------------------------------The Honorable Jack Caddell approved the recommendation ofRichard M. Blythe, the U.S. Bankruptcy Administrator for theNorthern District of Alabama in Decatur, appointing sevencreditors to serve on an Official Committee of UnsecuredCreditors in Verilink Corporation and its debtor-affiliateLarscom, Inc.'s chapter 11 cases: (1) The Kennedy Company, LLC Representative: Brent R. Cohen, Esq. Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons LLP 1200 17th Street, Suite 3000 Denver, CO 80202-5855 Tel: (303) 628-9521 Fax: (303) 623-9222 (2) Flash Electronics, Inc. Representative: Jas Mundra 4050 Starboard Drive Fremont, CA 94538 Tel: (510) 360-9068 Fax: (510) 440-2844 (3) Jack P. Reily Reily Communications Consulting 800 West 5th St. #608 Austin, TX 78703 Tel: (512) 322-9742 Fax: (512) 320-9927 (4) CM Solutions, Inc. Representative: Jack O'Rear P.O. Box 10 1005 Jefferson Drive Scottsboro, AL 35768 Tel: (256) 259-6500 Fax: (256) 259-1091 (5) HRH Representative: David W. Hobbs P.O. Box 10607 2101 6th Avenue North, Suite 1200 Birmingham, AL 35202-0607 Tel: (205) 871-3300 Fax: (205) 879-5508 (6) Micro Ram Electronics, Inc. Representative: Patrick Kraujalis 222 Dunbar Court Oldsmar, FL 34677 Tel: (813) 854-5500 Fax: (813) 818-9673 (7) Professional Teleconcepts, Inc. dba JT Communications, Inc. Representative: Theodore Wells 20 Aviador Street Camarillo, CA 93010 Tel: (805) 528-8577 Fax: (805) 987-8840Pursuant to Section 1102 of the Bankruptcy Code, the USBA isauthorized to recommend to the Court a committee of creditorsholding unsecured claims.Darryl S. Laddin, Esq., at Arnall Golden Gregory LLP and JaynaPartain Lamar, Esq., at Maynard, Cooper & Gale, P.C., gives legaladvice to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.Official creditors' committees have the right to employ legal andaccounting professionals and financial advisors, at the Debtors'expense. They may investigate the Debtors' business and financialaffairs. Importantly, official committees serve as fiduciaries tothe general population of creditors they represent. Thosecommittees will also attempt to negotiate the terms of aconsensual chapter 11 plan -- almost always subject to the termsof strict confidentiality agreements with the Debtors and othercore parties-in-interest. If negotiations break down, theCommittee may ask the Bankruptcy Court to replace management withan independent trustee. If the Committee concludes reorganizationof the Debtors is impossible, the Committee will urge theBankruptcy Court to convert the chapter 11 cases to a liquidationproceeding.Headquartered in Hunstville, Alabama, Verilink Corporation --http://www.verilink.com/-- is a leading provider of next- generation broadband access solutions for today's and tomorrow'snetworks. The Company develops, manufactures and markets a broadsuite of products that enable carriers and enterprises to buildconverged access networks to cost-effectively deliver next-generation communications services to their end customers. TheCompany and its debtor-affiliate, Larscom Inc., filed for chapter11 protection on April 9, 2006 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. Case No. 06-80566& 06-80567). Robert McCay Dearing Mercer, Esq., at PowellGoldstein LLP, represents the Debtors. Darryl S. Laddin, Esq., atArnall Golden Gregory LLP and Jayna Partain Lamar, Esq., atMaynard, Cooper & Gale, P.C., give legal advice to the OfficialCommittee of Unsecured Creditors. When the Debtors filed forprotection from their creditors, they listed total assets of$37,221,000 and total debts of $23,913,000.WORLDCOM INC: Inks Stipulation Expunging Bernard Ebbers' Claims---------------------------------------------------------------Consistent with the Ebbers Settlement Agreement, WorldCom, Inc.,and Bernard J. Ebbers stipulate that Claim Nos. 20659 and 36383will be disallowed and expunged in their entirety.On January 22, 2003, former WorldCom Chief Executive OfficerBernard J. Ebbers filed Claim No. 20659, asserting administrativeexpense claims and general unsecured claims for: -- amounts allegedly due or that become due under a certain Separation Agreement between Mr. Ebbers and the Debtors; -- the Debtors indemnification and related expense reimbursement obligations under the Restated Bylaws of MCI, Inc.; and -- the Debtors' obligations under a guaranty and letter agreements executed in connection with it.In October 2003, Mr. Ebbers filed Claim No. 36383, asserting a$12,166,752 unsecured non-priority claim on account of stockoptions that the Debtors rejected.Since April 2002, various actions were filed in, or transferredto, the United States District Court for the Southern District ofNew York, by and on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwisepublicly traded securities of WorldCom. Mr. Ebbers is nameddefendant in the Securities Litigation.The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New Yorkfacilitated a three-way settlement discussion among the Debtors,the Class and Mr. Ebbers.Headquartered in Clinton, Mississippi, WorldCom, Inc., now knownas MCI -- http://www.worldcom.com/-- is a pre-eminent global communications provider, operating in more than 65 countries andmaintaining one of the most expansive IP networks in the world.The Company filed for chapter 11 protection on July 21, 2002(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 02-13532). On March 31, 2002, theDebtors listed $103,803,000,000 in assets and $45,897,000,000 indebts. The Bankruptcy Court confirmed WorldCom's Plan on October31, 2003, and on April 20, 2004, the company formally emerged fromU.S. Chapter 11 protection as MCI, Inc. (WorldCom Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 117; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)WORLDCOM INC: Settles Philadelphia's Admin. Tax Claims for $432K----------------------------------------------------------------The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New Yorkapproved WorldCom, Inc., and its debtor-affiliates' stipulationwith the City of Philadelphia's administrative tax claims.As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter on April 24, 2006,the Debtors and the City agree that: (a) the Debtors will pay $432,634, to the City in full and complete satisfaction of all of the City's unsecured, priority and administrative tax claims against the Debtors. The Amount is to be paid as an administrative expense priority tax claim under Section 503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code for taxes and interest only; (b) the Debtors will pay the Settlement Amount, without delay, by check made payable to The City of Philadelphia and sent to: Carolyn Hochstadter Dicker, Klehr, Harrison, Harvey, Branzburg & Ellers LLP, 260 S. Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102-5003 (c) the non-filer liability listed in Claim No. 38595 for tax periods ending on or before December 31,1998, has been resolved through settlement of the Original Claims; (d) the Stipulation resolves all outstanding claims and tax liabilities between the Parties; (e) the Released Parties agree that any and all tax claims they may have against the City are also resolved by the Stipulation for any tax period ending on or before December 31, 2004; and (f) the City agrees that the overpayment shown on the 2004 Business Privilege Tax Return filed by MCI WorldCom Communications, Inc., for $334,673, is available to be used as a credit against the Debtors' 2005 Business Privilege Tax liability, assuming that the return is duly filed, as required.Headquartered in Clinton, Mississippi, WorldCom, Inc., now knownas MCI -- http://www.worldcom.com/-- is a pre-eminent global communications provider, operating in more than 65 countries andmaintaining one of the most expansive IP networks in the world.The Company filed for chapter 11 protection on July 21, 2002(Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Case No. 02-13532). On March 31, 2002, theDebtors listed $103,803,000,000 in assets and $45,897,000,000 indebts. The Bankruptcy Court confirmed WorldCom's Plan on October31, 2003, and on April 20, 2004, the company formally emerged fromU.S. Chapter 11 protection as MCI, Inc. (WorldCom Bankruptcy News,Issue No. 117; Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., 215/945-7000)ZOOMERS HOLDING: Inks $3.5 Mil. Financing Deal with D'Alessandro---------------------------------------------------------------- Zoomers Holding Company, LLC, asks the U.S. Bankruptcy Court forthe Middle District of Florida for authority to obtain debtor-in-possession financing from D'Alessandro Equity Funding, Inc.D'Alessandro agreed to lend the Debtor up to $3,500,000. TheDebtor will pay the loan by executing a promissory note on a24-month term and accruing interest on unpaid note balance at theannual rate of 12.49%. The Note would be secured by a first lienagainst all of the Debtor's real property.The loan will be guaranteed by the Debtor's manager, RonaldHeromin, and will prime existing first lien holder, FloridaCommunity Bank.The Debtor tells the Court that it failed to obtain betterfinancing terms from other sources.The Debtor will use the loan, among others, to: -- payoff all construction liens on its property and its outstanding construction indebtedness; -- provide additional funds to complete the construction of its family amusement park in Southwest Florida; -- provide working capital for approximate
