Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Rodriguez, 110 F.3d at 311 n. 16. Plaintiff’s claims herein were of such a nature. 183 . Rule 41(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, allows a district court to dismiss a case when the plaintiff fails to prosecute his case. Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 771 (5th Cir.1997), (habeas corpus action); Dorsey v. Scott Wetzel Services, Inc., 84 F.3d 170, 171 (5th Cir.1996), quoting Salinas v. Sun Oil Co., 819 F.2d 105, 106 (5th Cir.1987). The court may dismiss for want of prosecution either on a motion of a defendant or sua sponte when the court determines dismissal is necessary to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388-89, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962); Clofer v. Perego, 106 F.3d 678, 679 (5th Cir.1997), ; Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d at 771; Long v.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that district courts possess the inherent authority to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute with or sans notice to the parties
B. recognizing district courts inherent authority to dismiss with prejudice for abuse of judicial process
C. holding that a court may sua sponte dismiss pursuant to rule 41b for failure to comply with a court order
D. recognizing that a district court may sua sponte dismiss a complaint for failure to serve after notice to the plaintiff
E. recognizing a district judge may dismiss a case sua sponte under either rule 41b or its inherent authority to manage its docket
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.