Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of the entire Avoidance Order was conditioned upon the Debtors completing their Chapter 13 plan and receiving a discharge, but Provision C plainly states that “[i]n the event the Debtors fail to complete their Chapter 13 Plan and receive their discharge, the Mclnnises’ lien shall remain unaffected as to Section 506(a) and (d) of the Bankruptcy Code by this order.” (emphasis added). Provision C only limits the § 506 Avoidance, and Mclnnis’s argument that the § 522 Avoidance is now ineffective fails. The Second Avoidance Motion only seeks avoidance under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f), and the Avoidance Order did not similarly condition the § 522 Avoidance upon the Debtors completing their Chapter 13 plan and receiving a discharge. Cf. In re Allen, 217 B.R. 945, 948-49 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1998) . Collateral Estoppel Inapplicable to Issues
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that debtor could not avoid a judicial lien where after accounting for unavoidable liens and mortgages he had no equity in the property and therefore no interest on which to avoid the judicial lien
B. holding that a debtors ability to utilize  522f to avoid a judicial lien is not dependent upon the debtor receiving a discharge  
C. holding that chapter 20 debtor could not avoid lien because of ineligibility for discharge
D. holding state courts authority under iowa code section 59821 not the lien created there under prevented debtor from claiming the iowa homestead exemption and therefore the debtor could not avoid the lien because the lien did not impair an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled but for the lien
E. holding that the debtor must have had an interest in the property before the lien attached to take advantage of  522f
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.