Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Federal courts are presumed to lack jurisdiction unless the record affirmatively indicates the opposite. Renne v. Geary, 501 U.S. 312, 316, 111 S.Ct. 2331, 115 L.Ed.2d 288 (1991). Plaintiff seeks monetary damages for unjust conviction and wrongful imprisonment. “The United States Court of Federal Claims shall have jurisdiction to render judgment upon any claim for damages by any person unjustly convicted of an offense against the United States and imprisoned.” 28 U.S.C. § 1495 (2006). However, 28 U.S.C. § 2513(a) (2006), sets forth the requirements for bringing the claim recognized in § 1495: Any person suing under section 1495 of this title must allege and prove that: (1) His conviction has been reversed or set aside on the ground that he is not guilty of the offe 81 WL 21510 (1981) . Plaintiff contends that the Court of Federal
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that  1495 failed to provide court of federal claims with jurisdiction to hear claim for unjust conviction where requirements of  2513 have not been met
B. holding that this court lacked jurisdiction under  46110 for lack of finality and that the district court also lacked jurisdiction because the orders were not final and thus not ripe for review
C. holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to review state disciplinary proceedings against attorney
D. holding the court lacked jurisdiction under  1495 and 2513 without a certificate of innocence from the district court
E. holding that court of federal claims lacked jurisdiction under  2513 when trial courts order dismissing plaintiffs indictment and vacating his sentence failed to satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of  2513
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.