Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
“threshold requirement of any products-liability claim is that the plaintiff assert that the defendant’s product caused the plaintiffs injury.” This is known as the “product identification requirement.” Because Plaintiffs did not ingest the Brand Manufacturers’ drugs, their “misrepresentation” claims would fail if a state’s highest court would construe them as product liability claims under applicable state law. Second, even if a state’s highest court would not construe Plaintiffs’ claims as “product liability” claims, the claims were still properly dismissed if we predict that such courts would hold that the Brand Manufacturers do not owe users of generic drugs a duty that can give rise to liability. Before turning to our state-by-state Erie analysis, we note that an over th Cir.2013) ; Demahy v. Schwarz Pharma, Inc., 702 F.3d 177,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding name brand manufacturers may be held liable by consumers of generic drugs for representations made to prescribing physicians under vermont law
B. holding that no judgment can be rendered against defendant who cannot be held liable
C. holding that brand name manufacturers cannot be held liable for injuries caused by products they did not manufacture under arkansas law
D. holding that a brand manufacturer of prescription drugs cannot be held liable for injuries suffered by consumers who ingested only the generic form of a drug under florida law
E. holding that individual defendants may not be held liable for violations under title vii
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.