Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the agency”)). Sigma-tech’s focus on total contract price to determine whether the eight “small business” potential bidders were capable of performing the requirements of the November 1, 2016 Solicitation is contradictory to the USASAC’s analysis of the responses to the June 6, 2016 RFI. 4/21/17 Gov’t Resp. at 26. Moreover, the Contracting Officer was not required to conduct an analysis of the eight “small business” potential bidders’ use of subcontractors and whether they would be able to perform the requirements at fair market prices, because the Contracting Officer is not required to conduct this type of analysis before making a set-aside decision. 4/21/17 Gov’t Resp. at 29-30. (citing Adams & Assocs., Inc. v. United States, 741 F.3d 102, 111 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“Adams & Assocs. II") ). Finally, differences in the requirements of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that trial courts determination of whether defendant accepted responsibility should not be disturbed unless it is without foundation
B. recognizing that the determination is an equitable one
C. holding that the evidence supported two separate convictions and punishments for two attempted robberies of two different victims who suffered separate and distinct harms
D. holding that congress envisioned two separate petitions filed to review two separate final orders
E. holding that the rule of two does not require two separate but interrelated decisionsone as to responsibility and one as to a form of price reasonableness because that would conflate  a setaside determination with a responsibility determination made pursuant to 48 cfr  91041
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.