Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
research and development tasks was erroneous, because it was inaccurate and contrary to OHA precedent determining “research and development support” to be an acceptable justification for the NAICS Code 541712 designation. Pl. Mot. JAR at 22-23 (citing NAICS Appeal of DCS Corp., SBA No. NAICS-4874 (2007); see also NAICS Appeal of Davis-Paige Mgmt. Sys., LLC, SBA No. NAICS-5055 (2009)). Although some of the May 15, 2012 Solicitation’s research and development activities “envision direct performance on the part of the contractor,” the designation of NAICS Code 541712 also would be proper when “the work is an integral part of the research and development that will be conducted.” Pl. Mot.. JAR at 23 (citing NAICS Appeal of Information Ventures, Inc., SBA No. NAICS-4945, at 6-7 (2008) ). In sum, OHA’s decision was contrary to
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that congress intended the phrase physical force incorporated into  922g9 to encompass crimes characterized by the application of any physical force
B. recognizing that an arrest requires either physical force  or where physical force is absent submission to the assertion of authority
C. holding that work by the contractor that did not itself entail physical research nonetheless was an integral part of physical research to be performed by the agency and thus supported the designation of naics code 541712
D. holding that your work exclusion is triggered only where the damage at issue is to work performed by you and is caused by work performed by you  and does not apply to damage caused to original construction of a house during later repair work
E. holding iowa common law touching assault met use of physical force required for enhancement under 18 usc  922g9 be cause any physical contact by necessity requires physical force to complete
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.