Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the government and the recipient. In Jones, the Supreme Court emphasizes that the amount and nature of notice required by due process must take into account “unique information about an intended recipient regardless of whether a statutory scheme is reasonably calculated to provide notice in the ordinary case.” Jones, 126 S.Ct. at 1716. A fiduciary relationship between the government and the intended recipient certainly constitutes such “unique information” — especially in light of other relationships that have been consistently held to increase the government’s notice obligations. Where, for example, the notice recipient is a ward of the state (such as a prisoner), the government has been held to a higher standard of notice. See, e.g., Weng v. United States, 137 F.3d 709 (2d Cir.1998) ; United States v. Woodall, 12 F.3d 791, 794-95
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that burden is on government to show that error in failure to provide notice is harmless
B. holding that the government need not prove actual notice to the prisoner
C. holding that at a bare minimum the district court was required to provide a pro se prisoner with fair notice of the summary judgment rule requirements
D. holding that actual notice fulfills a notice requirement that an applicable federal regulation be conspicuously posted because actual notice is the best notice
E. holding that where the recipient is a federal prisoner the government is required to provide him with actual notice of a deprivation
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.