superior to that of any subsequent creditor. The Bankruptcy Court properly relied on In re Long Chevrolet, Inc., 79 B.R. 759 (N.D.Ill.1987), which concerned the refund of an excess contribution to a pension plan. Even though Long Chevrolet had to wait for the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation to approve the allocation and distribution of funds upon the termination of the plan, the court found that there was a transfer at the time Long Chevrolet first granted the security interest in the refund. As explained by the District Court in that case, just because Long “had to wait for those funds to be distributed does not mean it had no right to that property prior to that time.” Long Chevrolet, 79 B.R. at 765. See also In re Computer Eng’g Assocs., 337 F.3d 38, 45-47 (1st Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). As § 547(e)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code
holding that a defendants acceptance in california of an assignment of oil and gas leases was a contact with texas for personaljurisdiction purposes because the assignment was of real property interests located in texas even though the defendant never physically entered texas holding assignment of a mortgage was not subject to article 9 holding plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the validity of an assignment from mers to bac because she was not a party to the assignment and the assignment did not affect her underlying obligation to make timely payments holding that the transfer of all rights interests and control in property assigned was an effective assignment occurring at the time the assignment was perfected not later when proceeds paid holding the assignment of the mortgage once the original grant by the mortgagor to the mortgagee has been perfected does not involve a transfer of the property of the debtor 