Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
will exist whenever a defendant is served within the United States. See Lorelei Corp. v. County of Guadalupe, 940 F.2d 717, 719 (1st Cir.1991) ("[Sjufficient contacts exist whenever the defendant is served within the sovereign territory of the United States.”). If that is the case, proper service according to § 1132(e)(2) will always establish personal jurisdiction, because the defendant must be in the United States to be properly served under § 1132(e)(2). See Reimer Express, 230 F.3d at 941 ("The RICO and ERISA service of process provisions state that service may be made in 'any district,’ which indicates that Congress authorized service only in the judicial districts of the United States and not world-wide.”); see also Stauffacher v. Bennett, 969 F.2d 455, 460-61 (7th Cir.1992) . 4 . Cf. Omni Capital, 484 U.S. at 106, 108
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service
B. holding that ricos nationwide service of process provision did not authorize service outside the united states
C. recognizing that although provision of municipal service is not fundamental right inequitable provision of that service is subject to equal protection analysis
D. holding that  1132e2 allows for nationwide service of process and thus jurisdiction and that the nationwide service of process provision comports with the constitution
E. holding the rule 4 requirement of delivery to the appropriate united states attorney required personal service not service by certified mail
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.