Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
negligent misrepresentation, estoppel, and breach of contract claims when the assignee sued only in its capacity as a third party health care provider). Defendant therefore misapplies the general rule of exclusivity to the facts of this case, which resemble those in The Meadows. In that case, an assignee of the plan participant filed negligent misrepresentation, estoppel, and breach of contract claims against the plan. The district court dismissed the action, stating that because the plaintiff sued in its capacity as assign-ee, ERISA preempted the state law claims. Id. at 1008. When the plaintiff filed similar claims based on its status as a third party provider, however, and not as an assignee, the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s remand of the case to state court, /¿. In its complaint, its motion for remand, and
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted
B. holding the state law claims were not preempted
C. holding that state law fraud claims are preempted by the federal labor law duty of fair representation
D. holding state law fraud and deceit claims to be preempted
E. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.