Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
It was not until July 2, 2001, eleven months later still, that Baylor filed his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing his conviction and his sentence were unconstitutional under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435, which had been decided on June 26, 2000. In order to be timely, Bay 1998) (“the court’s equitable power to toll the statute of limitations will be exercised only in extraordinary and carefully circumscribed instances”). Counsel is under an obligation to check with reasonable frequency on the status of a pending case, a duty the discharge of which in Baylor’s case was never more than a phone call away, and which now may be discharged over the Internet as well. Cf. Fox v. American Airlines, Inc., 389 F.3d 1291, 1294 (D.C.Cir.2004) . Baylor’s petition for rehearing was filed on
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a claim filed after the last date fixed for the filing of claims was not a covered claim and noting that the requirement in the statute that claims be presented before the filing deadline evidences an intent on the part of the legislature to provide a cutoff date after which the association is no longer obligated to accept claims
B. holding that ordinarily courts are not obligated to review evidence presented for the first time on appeal
C. holding that the timely filing of an administrative charge of discrimination is a prerequisite to bringing suit
D. holding that attorneys are obligated to monitor the courts docket and the failure to do so will not excuse the lack of a timely filing
E. holding that the timely filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider with the bia does not toll the time period for seeking appellate court review and that the mere act of filing the motion does not render nonfinal the underlying bia decision
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.