Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
for $10,000. See V.R.C.P. 56(e) (“When a motion for summary is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of the adverse party’s pleading, but ... must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.”). ¶ 30. While we may not make negative inferences from a person’s decision to plead the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, “the Fifth Amendment privilege cannot be invoked as a shield to oppose depositions while discarding it for the limited purpose of making statements to support a summary judgment motion.” Edmond v. Consumer Prot. Div., 934 F.2d 1304, 1308 (4th Cir. 1991); cf. United States v. Sixty Thousand Dollars in U.S. Currency, 763 F. Supp. 909, 914 (E.D. Mich. 1991) . Confronted with evidence indicating that he
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that because claimant had asserted fifth amendment during discovery he may not submit affidavits in opposition to governments motion for summary judgment
B. holding that district court had ample authority to strike claimants affidavit offered in opposition to governments motion for summary judgment in forfeiture action after claimant invoked fifth amendment and refused to answer governments deposition questions
C. holding that party may not rely on its own testimony or affidavits to support its version of disputed fact issue in connection with summary judgment motion where party has asserted fifth amendment right not to answer questions concerning that veiy issue
D. holding that claims raised for the first time in an opposition to a motion for summary judgment are not properly before a court
E. holding that arguments not raised in opposition to a motion for summary judgment are waived
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.