Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
official policy, in flicts the injury that the government as an entity is responsible under § 1983. Id. at 691-94, 98 S.Ct. 2018 (emphasis added). Here, the record does not contain any plausible allegations that the Municipality was acting in a sovereign capacity pursuant to any statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom when it terminated the contract and took over the construction site and temporarily detained OSSAM’s property. There is no allegation in the Complaint that the Municipality acted pursuant to a statute, ordinance, or regulation. The complaint did state that the Municipality implemented “customs and policies” wh sometimes lead to governmental liability for breach of contract. See United States v. Winstar Corn,, 518 U.S. 839, 897, 116 S.Ct. 2432, 135 L.Ed.2d 964 (1996) . 7 . We do not suggest here that a
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous
B. holding that at will contracts of employment are subject to tortious interference with contracts claims
C. holding that the enactment of firrea breached certain government contracts
D. holding that the government was not bound by its waivers in three prior contracts
E. holding that a breach of contract claim was properly dismissed where plaintiff did not identify the contracts allegedly breached
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.