Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
any case that specifically addresses the precise issue here, i.e., whether the US-CIS’s termination of an alien’s refugee status constitutes final agency action.” R. 31 PagelD# : 568. But “the parties do cite cases that have considered whether the USCIS’s termination of an alien’s asylee status or its denial of an application to adjust status is final agency action within the meaning of the APA.” Id. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that “[t]hese cases provide a useful framework for resolving the issues before this Court.” Id. Where removal proceedings are pending, such as in this case, further administrative relief is available and the termination of an alien’s current status is an intermediate, nonfinal agency action. See Qureshi v. Holder, 663 F.3d 778, 781 (5th Cir.2011) ; see also Cabaccang v. USCIS, 627 F.3d 1313,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that epa action initiating permitting proceedings was not final agency action
B. holding that termination of asylum is not final agency action because it is only an intermediate step in a multistage administrative process succeeded or accompanied by removal proceedings
C. holding that it was within the discretion of the bia to deny a motion to reopen because it was not accompanied by an asylum application
D. holding that because the ij denied an asylum application as untimely we lacked subjectmatter jurisdiction to review the final order of removal as it pertained to the asylum claim
E. holding issuance of administrative complaint to initiate proceedings not final agency action
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.