Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
strategic purposes. The courts were justifiably cautious in observing the potential preclusive effect of such weak class actions. Coleman v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., No. 39-0211, 220 F.R.D. 64,-, 2004 WL 187332, at *18 (M.D.Tenn. Jan. 14, 2004). In contrast, in this case the court is satisfied that the interests of the named plaintiffs are aligned with the interests of the absent class members. Although the named plai ndem. Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 205, 211 (5th Cir.2003) (observing that “[fjraud actions that require proof of individual reliance cannot be certified as Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(3) class actions”; holding the district court committed reversible error by certifying a class in a RICO fraud action); Broussard v. Meineke Discount Muffler Shops, Inc., 155 F.3d 331, 342 (4th Cir.1998) ; Baum v. Great W. Cities, Inc., 703 F.2d 1197,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding damages do not constitute other equitable relief
B. holding professional rules do not provide basis for civil liability
C. holding that the equal protection and due process clauses of the fifth and fourteenth amendments do not provide a sufficient basis for jurisdiction because they do not mandate payment of money by the government
D. holding fraud claims do not provide a suitable basis for classwide relief
E. holding that claims not properly raised on direct appeal will not be considered as a basis for collateral relief
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.