Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Moore also took steps to try 5 F.2d at 550; RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 237). To the contrary, Morganti readily conceded that it always maintained sufficient funding for critical path work and that there was never a time when it lacked sufficient funding to proceed. Mr. Menefee, Morganti’s contract administrator, testified that Morganti never allowed its difficulties with getting money for CPC’s and modifications to affect critical path work, and that Morganti always provided funding necessary to pay the subcontractors. In fact, Morganti conceded on summary judgment that the FBOP’s payment errors never delayed Morganti. Thus, money was not the source of its inability to complete the contract work on time. D.W. Sandau Dredging, 96-1 BCA ¶ 28,064, at 140,161-62, 1995 WL 739023 . Morganti argues that its ability to perform
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that performance may be valid acceptance
B. holding that prior positive performance evaluations are not dispositive as to whether the employer was satisfied with the employees performance by the time of the termination
C. holding that governmentcaused delay in contractor performance violated implied duty not to hinder performance of other party
D. holding that continued performance is relevant to materiality where contractors performance failures were not caused by financial situation
E. holding that complete performance of contract constituted acceptance
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.