Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
inference of fraud or it will not satisfy even a relaxed pleading standard’ and it must also ‘allege that the necessary information lies within the defendant’s control, and then allegations must be accompanied by a statement of facts upon which allegations are based.’ ” United States ex rel. Sanders, 953 F.Supp. at 1413 (quoting United States ex rel. Stinson, Lyons v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Ga., 755 F.Supp. 1040, 1052 (S.D.Ga.1990)). Such “specific facts supporting a strong inference of fraud” are absent in Morrow’s complaint. Nonetheless, the complaint’s lack of particularity with respect to the allegation of fraudulent concealment need not necessitate the dismissal of that claim. It is true that a “district court is not required to grant a plaintiff leave 409 (9th Cir.1994) ; Alexander v. Vesta Ins. Group, Inc., 147
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that aims of wage and overtime provisions of flsa were not sufficiently connected to fourteenth amendment concerns so as to fall under congress  5 powers
B. holding that the flsa preempts certain state law claims
C. holding that the flsa does not prohibit changes in wage rates it prohibits the payment of overtime at less than one and onehalf times the regular wage rate
D. holding that the question of whether any employees were actually deprived of overtime compensation because of employers no overtime policy in violation of the flsa should have been addressed only at the damages stage of the proceedings
E. holding that flsa which provides an exemption from the acts wage and overtime provisions for fishermen preempts claims under alaskas minimumwage and overtime statute
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.