Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
will be granted only as to those issues that respond to an issue raised in a petition for reconsideration, the scope of a cross-petition for reconsideration is limited to those issues raised in a petition for reconsideration. In the present case, Eagle Water’s cross-petition for reconsideration was not filed within twenty-one days of the IPUC order certificating certain areas to United. Therefore, Eagle Water’s cross-petition for reconsideration was not timely as a petition for reconsideration and was necessarily limited in scope to those issues raised in United’s petition for reconsideration. A party may seek judicial review of an order of IPUC in accordance with I.C. § 61-627. Utah-Idaho Sugar Co. v. Intermountain Gas Co., 100 Idaho 368, 373, 597 P.2d 1058, 1063 (1979) . I.C. § 61-627 provides: After a petition for
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that prior ro decision that had not become final was not subject to cue collateral attack
B. holding that a judgment as to the title in a prior litigation was not subject to collateral attack
C. holding that final orders of ipuc are generally not subject to collateral attack and should be challenged either by a petition for reconsideration or appeal to this court in accordance with ic  61627
D. holding that orders remanding an action to a federal agency are generally not considered final appealable orders
E. recognizing that both final and nonfinal orders may be the subject of motions for reconsideration
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.