Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Sheriff’s Dep’t, 858 S.W.2d 573, 575 (Tex.App.—Austin 1993, writ denied). 38 . Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 405. 39 . Will, 491 U.S. at 71, 109 S.Ct. at 2312; Scott, 16 S.W.3d at 180. 40 . 932 S.W.2d at 287. 41 . Id. at 289. 42 . Id. 43 . Id. at 290, (citing Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 2.13(a) (Vernon Supp.2001)); Davis v. Passman, 442 U.S. 228, 246, 99 S.Ct. 2264, 2277, 60 L.Ed.2d 846 (1979). 44 . Will, 491 U.S. at 71, 109 S.Ct. at 2312. 45 . City of LaPorte v. Barfield, 898 S.W.2d 288, 291 (Tex.1995); City of Dallas v. Moreau, 718 S.W.2d 776, 779 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1986, writ ref'd n.r.e.). 46 . Moreau, 718 S.W.2d at 779. 47 . Will, 491 U.S. at 71, 109 S.Ct. at 2312; Scott, 16 S.W.3d at 180. 48 . See Salazar v. Morales, 900 S.W.2d 929, 932-34 (Tex.App.—Austin 1995, no writ) . 49 .Id. at 934; see also Barr v. Matteo, 360
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law  not arizona law  should be applied
B. holding sending two employees to work in texas and using an office in texas for limited purposes did not support finding of general jurisdiction
C. holding there was no general jurisdiction when there was no evidence that defendants advertised or promoted their goods or services in texas solicited business in texas sold their goods or services to a texas entity established a general business office or general business presence in texas or targeted texas markets
D. holding that texas attorney general has an absolute privilege to publish in response to news reporters inquiries material about employee terminations that may be perceived to be defamatory
E. holding that the court may issue an injunction prohibiting a defendant from repeating statements determined at trial to be defamatory
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.