to another by a contract of sale.” Therefore, absent a statutory right of redemption, the transfer of equitable title by the contract for sale completes the sale and ends a debtor’s right to cure the arrearage under § 1322(c)(1). The West Virginia Legislature has not protected the residents of this State with a statutory period of redemption following a foreclosure sale. See In re Thompson, 894 F.2d 1227, 1230 (10th Cir.1990) (stating that the dual purpose of a state’s statutory right of redemption following a foreclosure sale is to provide the debtor with the opportunity to refinance the property and to assure that the foreclosure sale brings a fair price); Oregon v. Hurt (In re Hurt), 158 B.R. 154, 158 (9th Cir. BAP 1993) (same); In re Barham, 193 B.R. 229, 232 (Bankr.E.D.N.C.1996) (<HOLDING>). While the court recognizes that a statutory
holding that the debtors could cure their arrearage until the expiration of the 10day upset bid period which would render the foreclosure sale complete under north carolina law holding that the debtor had the right to cure the default because the foreclosure sale was not complete under state law until it was confirmed by a court holding that a foreclosure sale was not complete under north carolina law until after the tenday statutory period of redemption had expired holding that a foreign subsidiary that is not registered to do business in north carolina has no place of business employees or bank accounts in north carolina does not design manufacture or advertise its products in north carolina and does not solicit business in north carolina cannot be subject to personal jurisdiction in north carolina even if some of the companys products do enter north carolina through the stream of commerce holding that because north carolina has opted out of the exemptions provided under 11 usc  522d the exemptions available for bankruptcy debtors in north carolina depend upon the law of north carolina