Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
testifying about the actual effect that the extraneous material had upon the jury’s deliberations or its verdict. To determine whether a probability of prejudice exists, the trial court should consider the following relevant inquiries: 1. The manner in which the extraneous material was received; 2. How long the extraneous material was available to the jury; 3. Whether the jury received the extraneous material before or after the verdict; 4. If received before the verdict, at what point in the deliberations was the material received; and 5. Whether it is probable that the extraneous material affected the jury’s verdict, given the overall strength of the opposing party’s case. See Doe, 101 N.M. at 366-67, 683 P.2d at 48-49; see also United States v. Hall, 85 F.3d 367, 371 (8th Cir.1996) . Additionally, the trial court should hold an
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that after court dismissed case at plaintiffs request notwithstanding the fact that jury had deliberated upon the case and indicated that it had reached a verdict there was no case pending in court on which a verdict could be predicated and the information which the judge got from an inspection of the petition handed to him by the foreman of the jury was information which he received as an individual and not as a judge of the court and further holding that despite violation of defendants right to receive the verdict that was purportedly reached the writing incorporated in the bill of exceptions as a verdict of the jury was in law no verdict because it was not received in court and published as required by law and was instead entirely extraneous and extrajudicial
B. recognizing the district judge diminished the prejudicial impact of the extrinsic evidence by properly instructing the jury for what limited purpose the extrinsic evidence was to be used
C. holding that in determining whether a discovery violation warrants the sanction of exclusion of evidence a court must look to whether the violation was substantial the timing of the violation the reason for the violation the degree of prejudice to the parties whether such prejudice may be cured by a postponement and the desirability of a continuance
D. holding that when determining prejudice under the objective test relevant considerations include 1 whether the extrinsic evidence was received by the jury and the manner in which it was received 2 whether it was available to the jury for a lengthy period of time 3 whether it was discussed and considered extensively by the jury 4 whether it was introduced before a jury verdict was reached and if so at what point during the deliberations and 5 whether it was reasonably likely to affect the verdict considering the strength of the governments case and whether the governments case outweighed any possible prejudice caused by the extrinsic evidence
E. holding that the key question in deciding whether the economic loss doctrine applies to a negligence claim is whether the negligence was extrinsic to the subject matter of the contract
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.