While in the public library, John, domiciled in Virginia, finds a stock certificate folded in a book that had been donated. The certificate is for 2,000 shares of ABC Corp. common stock. ABC Corp. was incorporated in Virginia and had its principal place of business there, but it went out of business 20 years ago. There is no market for the stock and it is essentially worthless. John initiates an action in the federal district court in Virginia to determine to whom the certificate belongs. At the time he brings the action, the certificate is in Virginia, John has relinquished control of the certificate to the court, and notice has been published in the newspaper. Does the court have in rem jurisdiction?

While in the public library, John, domiciled in Virginia, finds a stock certificate folded in a book that had been donated. The certificate is for 2,000 shares of ABC Corp. common stock. ABC Corp. is incorporated in Virginia and has its principal place of business there. John initiates an action in the federal district court in Virginia to determine to whom the certificate belongs. At the time he brings the action, the certificate is worth about $80,000, the certificate is in Virginia, and John has relinquished control of the certificate to the court. For the purposes of notifying potential defendants/claimants, John tacks a letter of notification on a local telephone pole. Does the court have in rem jurisdiction?

While in the public library, John, domiciled in Virginia, finds a stock certificate folded in a book that had been donated. The certificate is for 2,000 shares of ABC Corp. common stock. ABC Corp. is incorporated in Virginia and has its principal place of business there. John initiates an action in the federal district court in Virginia against Steven, who once owned these stock certificates, and who is also domiciled in Virginia. At the time he brings the action, the certificate is worth about $80,000, the certificate is in Virginia, and John has relinquished control of the certificate to the court. Steven receives adequate notice of the pending action and an opportunity to be heard. Steven moves to dismiss the complaint on the basis that he has no interest in the property. How will the court rule?