Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
it. The reasonableness and hence the constitutional validity of any chosen method may be defended on the ground that it is in itself reasonably certain to inform those affected.... Mullane, 339 U.S. at 315, 70 S.Ct. 652. The Court held that publication notice could not satisfy due process where the names and addresses of the beneficiaries were known. Id. at 320, 70 S.Ct. 652. Nevertheless, this due process right does not require actual notice to each party intended to be bound by the adjudication of a representative action. See id. at 313-14, 70 S.Ct. 652 (“A construction of the Due Process Clause which would place impossible or impracticable obstacles in the way could not be justified.”); accord In re Integra Realty Res., Inc., 262 F.3d 1089, 1110-11 (10th Cir. 2001) (“Integra I ”) . For due process purposes, rather than looking
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that in the rule 23 class action context named plaintiff may appeal a denial of class certification even if his or her individual claims had been satisfied through the entry of judgment
B. holding rule 23 and due process requisites satisfied where the record indicated that only seventyseven percent of class members actually received notice of the settlement
C. recognizing that the essential requisites of procedural due process are notice and meaningful opportunity to be heard
D. holding that under present rule settlement class must meet all rule 23 requirements and expressing concern about dangers of overrewarding attorneys and undereompensating class members
E. holding that entry of settlement decree without notice to putative class members violated the due process rights of the class members
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.