Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
him are not alleged to relate either to intimate human relations or to associations that exist for the purpose of engaging in activities protected by the First Amendment. The intimate human relations type of association is exemplified by familial relations, including marriage, raising and educating children and cohabiting with one’s relatives. Roberts, 468 U.S. at 619, 104 S.Ct. at 3250. While this type of association can extend to other types of relationships, depending on the size, purpose, policies, selectivity, congeniality and other characteristics of the “association” involved, plaintiff cites no case and this Court has not found one which would extend this type of association to the workplace. See, e.g., Copp v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 501, 882 F.2d 1547, 1551 (10th Cir.1989) . As for associations involving First Amendment
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that confrontation clause protections do not extend to sentencing hearings
B. holding that intimate human relationships are generally familial in nature and do not extend to workplace associations
C. holding that regulatory requirements are not jurisdictional in nature
D. holding that generally punitive damages are not available for a breach of contract
E. recognizing that the right does not extend to committing perjury
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.