Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
underlying offenses were charged under different indictment numbers; and separate judgments were imposed as to each conviction. The district court also f he armed robberies occurred on different dates with different victims. Moreover, only one of those armed robberies involved an accomplice. Rather, as shown above, the gist of defendant’s argument for why these four cases are related under § 4A1.2(a)(2) is that they were consolidated for purposes of sentencing. However, the district court did not clearly err in finding that they were not so consolidated based upon the separate indictments under which the cases were charged, the trial court’s entry of separate judgments in those cases, and the lack of a consolidation order. See United States v. Carter, 283 F.3d 755, 758 (6th Cir.2002) ; Odom, 199 F.3d at 324 (holding that the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding same and citing cases
B. holding that order could be appealed because ajlthough the district court did not make an express finding there is no doubt that the district court intended its orders to be final judgments for purposes of appeal
C. holding that even though the state trial court rendered its judgments in the defendants prior cases on the same day with their sentences to run concurrently the district court did not clearly err in finding that those prior cases were not consolidated for sentencing due to cases separate indictments and judgments and the absence of a consolidation order
D. holding that although not essential to the outcomes of two previous cases the court of appeals should have followed the texas supreme courts statements in those cases
E. holding that trial court did not err
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.