Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): 13 case, the starting point for determining the cram-down rate is the treasury rate, not the prime rate. 7 . Bankruptcy Judge Letitia Z. Paul, who is now retired, also issued an opinion that although not expressly holding that Till requires use of the Prime Plus Approach, nevertheless used this approach in determining the cramdown rate in a Chapter 13 case. In re Tirey, 350 B.R. 62, 69 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2006). 8 . In Montemayor, the real estate securing the claim was the debtors' homestead. [Case No. 10-36990, Doc, No. 1, p. 14 of 49], Because this property was the debtors’ principal residence, § 1322(b)(2) prevents modifying the rights of the lien holder—including changing the interest rate. See Nobelman v. Am. Sav. Bank, 508 U.S. 324, 331, 113 S.Ct. 2106, 124 L.Ed.2d 228 (1993) (<HOLDING>). However, § 1322(b)(5) provides an exception 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that  1322b2 prohibits modification of the interest rate on the loan on the debtors principal residence (B) holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract (C) holding that the determination of whether the debtor is using real property as his principal residence is made as of the petition date for the purposes of section 1322b2 (D) holding that citys tax hen on debtors principal residence was modifiable despite  1322b2 because not consensual and thus not a security interest (E) holding that modifying an interest rate in a bankruptcy plan constitutes an impermissible modification under  1322b2
Output (English): holding that modifying an interest rate in a bankruptcy plan constitutes an impermissible modification under  1322b2