Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
or omission outside of this state if he regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered, in this state; or (e)having an interest in, using, or possessing a real or immovable property in this state. In addition, La. R.S. 13:3202 expressly limited La.R.S. 13:3201 to causes of action arising from acts or omissions enumerated therein. 3 . In 1984, the designations were also changed from letters to numerals such that Subsection (h) is now Subsection (8). 4 . This Court has noted the difference, in the context of personal jurisdiction in products liability cases, between a manufacturer and a distributor. McBead Drilling Co. v. Kremco, Ltd., 509 So.2d 429, 432 (La.1987) . 5 . Federal circuit courts are somewhat
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding over
B. holding that the district court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over related statelaw claims once it has dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction
C. holding that the defendant lacked sufficient contacts with the forum state because there was no evidence the defendant knew where the product would be sold
D. holding that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over a nonresident auto distributor whose only connection to the forum resulted from a customers decision to drive there failed to provide the defendant with clear notice that it would be subject to suit in the forum state and thus an opportunity to alleviate the risk of burden some litigation there
E. holding that in litigation arising from a product related injury in the forum state there are significant differences between the exercise of jurisdiction over a retailer who simply sold the product locally and the exercise of jurisdiction over a manufacturer whose products were sold over a large area
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.