Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
stating that “[an] argument that the trial judge exceeded his discretion by enjoining the appellants beyond the time specified in the ... contract is without merit”). We agree with Guy Carpenter. The expiration of the one-year contract limit does not make this issue moot. If this Court remands, the district court has the power under Texas law to craft an injunction that extends beyond the expiration of the non-solicitation covenant. Exercising this equitable power might be particularly appropriate given the district court’s year-long delay before ruling on the motion to reconsider. We note that neither case Provenzale cites in support of his mootness argument is relevant to the facts of this case. See Hi-Line Electric Co. v. Dowco Electrical Products, 765 F.2d 1359, 1363 (5th Cir.1985) ; John R. Ray & Sons, Inc. v. Stroman, 923
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the injunction did not constitute a claim
B. holding plaintiffs appeal of the denial of a preliminary injunction moot where defendants directive no longer in effect
C. holding that where a noncompetition clause in a contract had expired by its own terms the plaintiffs appeal from the district courts denial of the plaintiffs request for a preliminary injunction enforcing the clause was moot
D. holding an appeal of injunction moot where the injunction expired three months before the appellate court heard arguments in the case
E. holding that where a district courts preliminary injunction preventing the appellant from terminating its agreement with the defendant had expired the appellants appeal of the district courts decision to grant that injunction was moot
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.