Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
requires that Yoon “reside[] continuously in the United States for a period of not less than 7 years immediately preceding the date of initiation of proceedings to remove [him] from the United States.” Id. at § 1182(h)(2) (emphasis added). For both a cancellation and a § 212(h) waiver, the period of lawful continuous residency terminates when the alien is served with a notice to appear. Id. at §§ 1229b(d)(1) and 1182(h). Yoon gained lawful entry into the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) on May 15, 1996. However, residence in the CNMI before 2009 was not residence in the United States. See Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-229, §§ 701-702, 122 Stat. 754 (2008) (codified at 48 U.S.C. § 1806); Eche v. Holder, 694 F.3d 1026, 1030 (9th Cir.2012) . Thus, Yoon’s admission into the CNMI on May
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that defendant was not in custody during search of his residence
B. holding that residence in the cnmi before 2009 was not residence in the united states for naturalization purposes
C. holding residence means legal residence for will probate
D. holding that a warrant authorizing the search of a residence vehicles at the residence and all persons found in the residence was not overly broad given that search was limited to places were drugs or weapons might be found
E. holding that a realestate appraisal was not a guarantee of the condition of the residence but a valuation of the residence and thus not a misrepresentation
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.