Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
adequately to explain the distinction it has drawn proves fatal to its regulation as applied in this case. II. Beads ISKCON also wants to go on selling two types of beads at its stand on the Mall. One type apparently serves as an instrument of prayer and meditation while the other serves to identify the wearer as a devotee of Krishna. ISKCON’s sale of the former is of no moment to the First Amendment; those beads may be an aid to spiritual activity, but they are not in themselves communicative. I presume that the Park Service could not prohibit the use of a rosary or perhaps of a prayer mat on the Mall, but that does not mean that it must also allow vendors to sell them there. See There to Care, Inc. v. Commissioner of Indiana Department of Revenue, 19 F.3d 1165, 1167 (7th Cir.1994) . The so-called identification beads, on the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that neglect was not excusable where the defendants did not do all that they were required to do after they received the summons and complaint in that they did not contact a lawyer or make any other arrangements with respect to their defense
B. holding that plaintiffs did not have standing because they did not sue the party with the clear ability to act
C. holding a district courts failure to give a same decision instruction harmless because the evidence before the jury strongly supported the conclusion that the plaintiffs were discharged in retaliation for their overtime complaints and that they would not have been discharged had they not engaged in this protected conduct
D. holding words used in bingo game not protected because they did not convey ideas
E. holding that the presumption of uniformity gives way where the subjectmatter to which the words refer is not the same in the several places where they are used
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.