Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
U.S. 555, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). An individual must satisfy a three-prong test in order to establish standing. See id. First, the individual must have suffered some injury in fact — an invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete and particularized and actual or imminent. See id. at 560, 112 S.Ct. 2130; MD Pharmaceutical Inc. v. Drug Enforcement Admin., 133 F.3d 8, 11 (D.C.Cir.1998) (concluding that current manufacturer had standing to seek review of actions taken by the DEA). In some cases, a plaintiff may be injured when the “discriminatory classification preventfs] the plaintiff from competing on an equal footing.” Northeastern Fla. Chapter, Associated Gen. Contractors of America v. Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656, 667, 113 S.Ct. 2297, 124 L.Ed.2d 586 (1993) . Second, the injury must be fairly traceable
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the claims to a statutory benefit had not yet vested when the legislature eliminated the benefit
B. holding that a debtor need not have received a benefit from the fraudulent activity in order for  523a2a to prevent a discharge
C. holding that when the government erects a barrier in order to establish standing a group seeking to challenge the barrier need not allege they would have attained the benefit but for the barrier
D. holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court
E. holding that the burden is on the plaintiff to allege facts sufficient to establish jurisdiction
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.