Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
estate. 6 . In June 2007 some members of Classes 2 and 3 of the Track One plaintiffs proceeded to a bench trial against four defendants, including AstraZeneca, and the district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. In re Pharm. Indus. Average Wholesale Price Litig., 491 F.Supp.2d 20, 29-32 (D.Mass.2007) (In re Pharm. Trial). 7 . Howe had earlier filed an objection to the settlement that essentially cited, for three pages, Howe's earlier pleadings before the court without stating any specific grounds for the objection. During the fairness hearing, the district court properly held that anything raised in this pleading that Howe did not explain in the reply brief was waived. See TAG/ICIB Servs. Inc. v. Sedeco Servicio de Descuento en Compras, 570 F.3d 60, 66 n. 6 (1st Cir.2009) . 8 . The “heartland period,” which the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court
B. holding that an issue is waived where the defendant failed to develop an argument in his appellate brief and cited no authority
C. holding an argument waived in part because the party failed to develop it in the district court
D. holding that the defendant waived argument on appeal by failing to develop a cogent argument
E. holding party failed to develop any argument on this front and thus has waived it
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.