Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
immunity because its contract with a federal agency was not the result of lobbying, and did not involve the First Amendment right to petition the government. Because that case concerned copyright misuse, the Ninth Circuit gave this issue cursory treatment. Significantly, the Ninth Circuit has ruled, in the company of the Eleventh and Fifth Circuits, that a so-called commercial exception to antitrust immunity does not exist. See In re Airport Car Rental Antitrust Litig., 693 F.2d 84, 86 (9th Cir.1982); TEC Cogeneration Inc. v. Florida Power & Light Co., 76 F.3d 1560, 1572 (11th Cir.1996) (rejecting as erroneous district court’s reliance on “perceived commercial exception”). See also Independent Taxicab Drivers’ Employees v. Greater Houston Transp. Co., 760 F.2d 607, 613 (5th Cir.1985)  (citation omitted)—a circumstance not unlike
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the government contractor defense applies in situations in which the government makes the informed decision not to include a specification or require a warning because in the governments view one would be unnecessary or problematic
B. holding in land use situations courts have concluded in order for a regulatory takings claim to be ripe there must be a final decision regarding the application of the regulations to the property at issue
C. holding that noerrpennington extends to situations where the government enters into a contractual relationship with a private entity at least in situations where the government engages in a policy decision and at the same time acts as a participant in the marketplace 
D. holding that the government may intervene in the marketplace to protect consumer welfare
E. holding that the government is liable under the ftca in the same respect as a private person under the law of the place where the act occurred
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.