Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
summary judgment: (1) the action was barred by the statute of limitations; (2) the action was barred by the plaintiff’s laches; (3) the plaintiff failed to exhaust his remedies under the grievance procedure of the collective bargaining agreement; (4) the Union is a necessary and indispensable party. The trial court’s ruling was based solely on the first ground, and that is our primary concern here. However, since defendant also relies on the other grounds on this appeal, we will also deal with them. Whether jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship or § 301 of the LMRA, the law of Nebraska relative to the appropriate statute of limitations applies. See International Union, United Automobile, etc. v. Hoosier Cardinal Corp., 383 U.S. 696, 86 S.Ct. 1107, 16 L. Ed.2d 192 (1966) . Nebraska has a statute of limitations of four
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding statute of limitations should not be equitably tolled for taxpayer who filed a refund claim after the applicable statute of limitations
B. holding that state court with jurisdiction over  301 claim should have applied federal labor law rather than state contract law
C. holding that absent an applicable federal statute of limitations state statutes of limitations should be applied in  301 cases if they are not in conflict with federal policy
D. holding that duress toll to statute of limitations under state law had no application to federal rico statute of limitations
E. holding that where congress does not establish a statute of limitations applicable to a federal cause of action a void which is commonplace in federal statutory law  this court has repeatedly borrowed the state law of limitations governing an analogous cause of action
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.