Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
to strike are pending. In such circumstances, the trial court is given the limited jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the motion in order to decide if it should award attorney fees and costs to the defendants.”). The reasoning for this retention of limited jurisdiction makes intuitive sense.’As the court in Col-train v. Shewalter explained, a voluntary dismissal should not automatically preclude an award of attorneys’ fees to a defendant because [ojtherwise, SLAPP plaintiffs could achieve most of their objective with little risk — by filing a SLAPP suit, forcing the defendant to incur the effort and expense of preparing a special motion to strike, then dismissing the action without prejudice. The specter of the action being refiled (at ptr.2d 807 (1999), as modified (Feb. 5, 1999) ; eCash Techs., Inc. v. Guagliardo, 127
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the filing of notice without motion is insufficient
B. holding that substance of motion to extend time was a section 1301f motion rather than a section 1301g motion and that trial court did not abuse discretion in denying the section 1301f motion
C. holding motion for attorneys fees was necessary predicate
D. holding that a defendant who is voluntarily dismissed with or without prejudice after filing a section 42516 motion to strike is nevertheless entitled to have the merits of such motion heard as a predicate to a determination of the defendants motion for attorneys fees and costs under subdivision c of that section
E. holding that because the finality of judgment is effectively postponed by the timely filing of a motion under rule 59 the deadline for filing a motion for attorneys fees is tolled until the postjudgment motion is resolved
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.