Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
asked to determine whether, in Wyoming, a commercial easement in gross is freely assignable. Declining the request to answer so broad a question, we affirm the decision of the district court on other grounds. I. ISSUES Appellants state the issues on appeal: 1. Is a commercial easement in gross an assignable easement? 2. Is the grantee of an easement in gross judicially estopped to deny its as-signability when he signs a stipulation in a prior proceeding which conveys to the heirs, executors and assigns? Appellees restate the issue: A Whether the easement granted to Francis and Elvira Thar in 1976 is assignable. II. FACTS In 1976, Edwin N. Moran (Moran), granted an easement across his land to Francis and Elvira Thar (the Thars). The easement provided access to a landloc 946, 947 (1983) ; Newhoff v. Mayo, 48 NJ.Eq. 619, 23 A, 265,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that an easement may entitle the easement owner to do acts which were not for the easement would constitute a nuisance
B. holding that an appurtenant easement is an incident of the estate granted and passes with it
C. holding that an easement by prescription may be obtained against the holder of a present interest but that that prescriptive easement is subject to divestment if and when the property passes to the holder of a future interest
D. holding that an easement agreement and an unrecorded easement plan created an easement
E. holding that one who possesses deeded easement need not use the easement to maintain his title and easement cannot be extinguished from nonuser alone
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.