Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Facts. On December 13, 2004, the court held a status conference. On December 23, 2004, the Government filed a Reply to DCI’s Response to the Government’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. On January 7, 2005, the parties filed a proposed Scheduling Order. The court held status conferences on January 11, 2005 and on January 18, 2005. On January 18, 2005, the court entered a Scheduling Order for fact discovery and expert discovery and established a trial date to commence on November 14, 2005. On July 29, 2005, the court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order denying DCFs October 7, 2004 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and denying the Government’s November 18, 2004 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. See Die Casters Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 67 Fed.Cl. 362 (Fed.Cl. 2005) . The Memorandum Opinion and Order confirmed
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding summary judgment was not warranted because material facts were in dispute
B. holding summary judgment for the employer was warranted because the only evidence in support of plaintiffs claims was solomons own testimony
C. holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if there is a genuine dispute about a material fact
D. holding in the alternative that summary judgment was warranted on abuse of process claim because defendants established probable cause to prosecute plaintiffs
E. holding that if no material facts are placed in dispute this court must determine whether the circuit court correctly entered summary judgment as a matter of law citations omitted
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.