Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
trial court. We read the trial court’s comment that Digital Broadcast had not complied with the requirements of Rule 55(c) as a reference to the requirement of a verified answer or assertion of the court’s lack of jurisdiction. Although the trial court did not explain why the asserted lack of personal jurisdiction was insufficient, we conclude that the assertion fails as a matter of law. Digital Broadcast’s only asserted defense was that the Superior Court lacked personal jurisdiction because Digital Broadcast is incorporated and located elsewhere and has “no business operations in the District of Columbia.” In asserting that defense, Digital Broadcast bore the burden of alleging facts that, if proven, would demonstrate a lack of personal jurisdiction. Cf. Venison, 756 A.2d at 911-12 . Digital Broadcast failed to meet that burden.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that plaintiffs statistical evidence failed to establish prima facie case or pretext where evidence failed to make specific analytical comparisons
B. holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation because there was no evidence that the decisionmaker knew of the plaintiffs protected conduct
C. holding that without more the mere fact that the prosecutor used a high number of strikes to remove women from the venire is insufficient to establish a prima facie case
D. holding that the simple assertion that the district of columbia failed to follow the proper procedures in selling a property for delinquent taxes without citing supporting evidence is insufficient to establish a prima facie defense under rule 60b
E. holding that a movants failure to establish a prima facie case for the underlying substantive relief is a proper ground for the bia to deny a motion to reopen
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.