Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
supra, at page 64. Since there is not one rule or principle of law that can dispose of the issue in all cases, J. B. Henriques, Inc. v. United States, supra, each ease, when you come down to it, must stand on its own particular facts. The applicable law under paragraph 1558 is clear. “To constitute an article 'manufactured’ it is not necessary that the article be converted into a new and different article, having a distinctive name, character or use different from that of the original article (such would be the requirement to constitute an article a ‘manufacture’), but only that the article be so processed that it be removed from its crude or primary state, though it remain a variety of the original material. * * Chas. H. Demarest, Inc. v. United States, supra, 44 CCPA at page 137  The facts here are not in dispute. The
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the changes to as0910030 were not intended to be retrospective
B. holding that industrial wastes were not products under a products hazard exception because they were not intended for consumption sale or use by others 
C. holding that where palmyra fibers were trimmed to advance the merchandise towards its intended use the fibers were manufactured under paragraph 1558
D. holding that the litigation privilege did not preclude a malicious prosecution claim where the accusatorial statements that led to the plaintiffs arrest were made before the charges against him were filed and were not made during and were unrelated to the judicial proceeding
E. holding that conveyances were not intended to defraud creditors
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.