Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the VCAA, that amendment to section 5107(a) is applicable to “any claim ... filed before the date of the enactment of [the VCAA] and not final as of that date.” VCAA § 7(a). The VCAA also amended 38 U.S.C. § 5103 (“Notice to claimants of required information and evidence”) and added 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (“Duty to assist claimants”). VCAA § 3(a). The appellant argues that the September 2000 BVA decision should be vacated and the matter remanded for readjudication in light of the enactment of the VCAA. Appellant’s Brief (Br.) at 3-4. Specifically, he argues that the VCAA “significantly modified] the provisions of chapter 51 of [title 38 of the United States Code], which addresses ‘claims, effective dates, and payments’ ” and that, because the 001) (en banc) . Accordingly, because the appellant’s VCAA
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding vcaa inapplicable to claim that ro decision contained cue
B. holding that cue existed in ro decision that had reduced veterans benefits where court found that it is evident that cue existed therein
C. holding that prior ro decision that had not become final was not subject to cue collateral attack
D. holding that cue motion is not claim for benefits and that vcaa definition of claimant cannot encompass person seeking revision of final decision based on cue
E. holding that once a regional office decision is final a claimant may only attempt to overcome the finality of that decision in one of two ways a request for revision of the decision based on clear and unmistakable error or a claim to reopen based upon new and material evidence
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.