Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the record neither compels, nor supports, a reversal of the IJ and BIA’s decisions. Thus, we deny the petitioners’ petition for review. PETITION DENIED. 1 . Repizo also argues that the lack of corroborative evidence to support his allegations of persecution was due to ineffective assistance of counsel, and indicates that he recendy filed a motion to reopen removal proceedings with the BIA on said grounds. Since the BIA has yet to make a determination with regard to his motion to reopen, we lack jurisdiction to review Repizo's ineffective assistance of counsel claim because he has not yet exhausted his administrative remedies. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Amaya-Artunduaga v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 463 F.3d 1247, 1250 (11th Cir.2006)
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that we lack jurisdiction to consider claims that have not been raised before the bia
B. holding that appellate jurisdiction over final orders of removal are limited to claims that have been exhausted before the bia
C. holding that this court lacks jurisdiction to review claims that have not been raised before the bia
D. holding that court of appeals statutory jurisdiction over final orders of removal extends to reinstatement orders
E. recognizing that orders denying motions to reopen are treated as final orders of removal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.