Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
2145, 165 L.Ed.2d 92 (2006) (noting that SLUSA “does not itself displace state law with federal law but mak urt observed, the complaints alleged that “the false promise of best execution .,. induce[d] [Plaintiffs] to purchase or sell securities through Schwab for a fee, and [] caused losses directly resulting from what clients believed . to be legitimate securities transactions.” The net price obtained when purchasing or selling a security is plainly material to a buyer or seller, and the alleged breach here coincided with-securities transactions. See Kurz, 556 F.3d at 641 (finding that an argument “that the duty of best execution is not in connection with the purchase or sale of securities ... is frivolous, given Dabit ”) (internal quotation marks omitted); Newton, 135 F.3d at 270 ; Rayner, 248 F.Supp.3d at 504 (holding that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding breach of best execution duty is a material misrepresentation in connection with the purchase or sale of the securities
B. recognizing a duty of best execution under federal securities law
C. recognizing a  10b claim for breach of duty of best execution
D. holding that a plaintiff alleging securities fraud must show that a defendant 1 made a material misrepresentation or a material omission as to which he or she had a duty to speak 2 with scienter 3 in connection with the purchase or sale of securities
E. holding that slusa preempts claims which allege a material misrepresentation or omission in connection with the purchase or sale of securities whether or not that allegation is an element of or otherwise necessary to the putative state claim
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.