Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of Justice, 416 F.3d 129, 130-31 (2d Cir.2005) (finding that the birth of U.S. citizen children constitutes a change in personal circumstances, not a change in country conditions, and therefore does not establish an exception to the filing deadline for motions to reopen). Furthermore, despite Chen’s submission of various allegedly official Chinese government documents, as well as recent country reports and a letter from her its discretion in concluding that Chen provided insufficient evidence that the birth of her U.S. citizen children violated the family planning policy in her area of residence in China, or that the implementation of sanctions resulting from any possible violation would rise to the level of persecution. Cf. Jian Xing Huang v. INS, 421 F.3d 125, 129 (2d Cir.2005) . We decline to examine Chen’s argument
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an applicants fear was not objectively reasonable because it lacked solid support in the record and was merely speculative at best
B. holding that absent solid support in the record for the petitioners assertion that he would be persecuted his fear was speculative at best
C. holding that absent solid support in the record for the petitioners assertion that he would be subjected to persecution his fear was speculative at best
D. holding that absent solid support in the record a petitioners fear is speculative at best
E. holding that in the absence of solid support in the record for an applicants assertion that she would be persecuted the bia did not err in denying asylum because her fear was speculative at best
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.