With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". is made.” Id. at 5. Unlike the cases cited above, the cessation of the “collection process” here was not conditioned on the full payment of the debt, see Kramsky, 00-CIV-2936 at 5, and there was no demand for immediate payment that contradicted the validation notice. Savino, 164 F.3d at 84. The letter that Nichter sent to plaintiff contained the required validation notice, and it was not overshadowed by the other language in the notice. The validation notice was printed directly beneath the request for payment in full, in the same font size, and on the same page. Cf. Sokolski, 53 F.Supp.2d at 311 (noting that the validation notice was at the bottom of the page, in single spaced, significantly smaller typeface); Unger v. Nat’l Revenue Group Ltd., No. Civ. A. 99-3087, 2000 WL 1897346, *3 (<HOLDING>). The contested statement also did not indicate

A: holding that the validation notice is overshadowed where a debt collector serves a consumer with process initiating a lawsuit during the validation period without clarifying that commencement of the lawsuit has no effect on the information conveyed in the validation notice
B: holding that the full payment rule literally requires full not partial payment and rejecting the argument that a partpayment remedy is necessary when a taxpayer is too poor to pay the full amount of the tax
C: holding that the full payment rule is applicable to refund suits in the court of federal claims
D: holding that the validation notice was overshadowed by language that payment in full is due now that was in larger print
D.