Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
device; a person who transcribes recorded testimony; an attorney for the government; or a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (in). Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)(2). The D.C. Circuit has held that Rule 6(e) qualifies as an Exemption 3 withholding statute, even though the Criminal Rules are ordinarily not labeled as such. See Senate of P.R. v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 823 F.2d 574, 582 & n. 23 (D.C.Cir.1987) (“although rules of procedure promulgated by the Supreme Court generally do not qualify as ‘statutes’ for exemption (b)(3) purposes!,] [Rule 6(e)] does so qualify because it was specifically adopted by an Act of Congress.”) (internal citation omitted). See also Fund for Constitutional Gov’t v. Nat’l Archives & Records Serv., 656 F.2d 856, 867 (D.C.Cir.1981) . In this case, the FBI relied on Exemption 3
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the statute qualifies as an exemption 3 statute
B. holding that rule 6e qualifies as a statute for purposes of exemption 3
C. holding act qualifies as exemption statute under exemption 3
D. holding that  6103 qualifies as an exemption statute
E. holding that various versions of the statute qualify as an exemption 3 statute
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.