Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Lerer, Inc. v. District Court, 111 Nev. 1165, 1168, 901 P.2d 643, 645 (1995); NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330. 9 See Pan v. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004) (noting that if appellate jurisdiction is proper, writ relief is inappropriate because an appeal is an adequate remedy). 10 See Nev. Const, art. 6, § 4; Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). 11 NRAP 3A(b)(1). 12 109 Nev. 662, 665, 856 P2d 244, 246 (1993). 13 See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000) (clarifying that “a final judgment is one that disposes of all the issues presented in the case, and leaves nothing for the future consideration of the court, except for post-judgment issues”). 14 Cf. State v. Ducker, 35 Nev. 214, 225-26, 127 P. 990, 993-94 (1912) . 15 Ashokan, 109 Nev. at 665, 856 P.2d at 246.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the lawofthecase doctrine applies to preliminary injunctions and stating that tjhe exception to law of the case where evidence on a subsequent trial is substantially different is inapplicable where by the prior appeal the issue is not left open for decision
B. holding that rule 11 applied to a letter sent with the intent to influence the court with respect to injunctive relief
C. recognizing that in the case provided for by law as mentioned in a former version of nrs 2090 with respect to injunctive relief refers to the sections of the statutes concerning injunctions
D. holding that application of equitable principles in evaluating requests for permanent injunctions under the patent act should not differ from treatment of permanent injunctions in other fields of law
E. holding that a court may award injunctive relief against a state officer
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.