Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
administrative code); Regan v. City of New Brunswick, 305 N.J.Super. 342, 353-55, 702 A.2d 523 (App.Div.1997) (reinstating complaint, where employee did not identify until appeal the criminal statutes he believed were being violated, on the basis that they were identifiable from the record and from the employee’s description of the nature of the illegal conduct he suspected). However, the court must make that identification before permitting trial of a CEPA claim under N.J.S.A. 34:19-3c. It “must first find and enunciate the specific terms of a statute or regulation, or the clear expression of public policy, which would be violated if the facts as alleged are true.” Fineman v. New Jersey Dep’t of Human ane v. Gilian Instrument Corp., 271 N.J.Super. 476, 493-94, 638 A.2d 1341 (App.Div.) , certif. denied, 136 N.J. 298, 642 A.2d 1006
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the trial court should have dismissed the employees breach of contract claim
B. holding cepa claim to have been properly dis missed because the court found that the disclosure involves nothing more than a policy dispute
C. holding cepa claim to have been properly dismissed because the challenged conduct was contrary to employees principles or sense of company priorities but was not illegal or wrongful
D. holding that a party must at least have a subjective belief that litigation was a real possibility and that belief must have been objectively reasonable
E. holding cepa claim to have been properly dismissed because employees general invocation of federal labor and tax law was inadequate basis for reasonable belief in illegal activity
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.