Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
in the regulation of interstate commerce in order to prevent unjust discrimination. Id. at 97, 35 S.Ct. 494. Thus, even if a carrier intentionally misrepresents its rate and a customer relies on the misrepresentation, the carrier cannot be held to the promised rate if it conflicts with the published tariff. See AT & T Co., 524 U.S. at 222, 118 S.Ct. 1956 (citing Kansas City Southern R. Co. v. Carl, 227 U.S. 639, 653, 33 S.Ct. 391, 57 L.Ed. 683 (1913)). i. The filed-tariff doctrine bars courts from hearing challenges to duly filed rates In addition, and of moment in this case, the filed-tariff doctrine bars eourts from hearing any challenge to duty filed rates. See, e.g., Montana-Dakota Utils. Co. v. Northwestern Pub. Serv. Co., 341 U.S. 246, 251-52, 71 S.Ct. 692, 95 L.Ed. 912 (1951) ; Fax Telecomm. Inc., 138 F.3d at 489 (by
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that once a rate is filed with the appropriate agency except for review of the agencys orders the courts can assume no right to a different rate on that ground that in its opinion it is the only or the more reasonable rate
B. holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract
C. holding that the petitioner can claim no rate as a legal right  other than the filed rate whether fixed or merely accepted by the agency commission
D. holding that under the filed rate doctrine a question regarding reasonable rates should be addressed to the department of insurance and that the rate plaintiff was charged is conclusively presumed reasonable under the filed rate doctrine
E. holding that a utility can claim no rate as a legal right that is other than the filed rate whether fixed or merely accepted by the commission
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.