Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Stair provided false information or failed to provide material exculpatory information to the assistant prosecutor,” the district court ruled that summary judgment in favor of the defendants was proper. Autrey now appeals from that determination. DISCUSSION We review de novo the grant of summary judgment by a district court. See Ciminillo v. Streicher, 434 F.3d 461, 464 (6th Cir.2006). Summary judgment should be granted “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed R. Civ. P. 56(a). A genuine dispute of material fact exists only when, assuming the truth of the non-moving party’s evidence and construing all inferences from that evidence 010) (malicious prosecution under the Fourth Amendment) ; Matthews v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the plaintiff must show that there was a lack of probable cause for the criminal prosecution
B. holding that malicious prosecution plaintiff must show inter alia that criminal proceeding was initiated without probable cause
C. holding that a malicious prosecution plaintiff must show inter alia that the criminal proceeding was initiated without probable cause
D. holding that a necessary element for malicious prosecution under virginia law is lack of probable cause
E. holding that the plaintiff must show that the person instituting or maintaining the prosecution lacked probable cause for bringing the action
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.