Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
no earlier than December 7, 2003. If their claims accrued before that date, then this court is without jurisdiction to hear them. A. Claim Accrual and Statute of Limitations in Overflight Takings Cases A claim against the government under the Tucker Act first accrues “when all the events which fix the government’s alleged liability have occurred and the plaintiff was or should have been aware of their existence.” Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. United States, 855 F.2d 1573, 1577 (Fed.Cir.1988) (emphasis in original). In determining whether plaintiffs knew, or should have known, of the requisite factual predicates establishing the government’s alleged liability in this case, the court must apply an objective standard. See Fallini v. United States, 56 F.3d 1378, 1380 (Fed.Cir.1995) . Because plaintiffs bear the burden of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing cause of action
B. holding that a plaintiff does not have to possess actual knowledge of all the relevant facts in order for the cause of action to accrue
C. holding that ratification requires full knowledge of all the facts upon which the unauthorized action was taken
D. holding illinois courts have frequently recognized  a cause of action for legal malpractice will rarely accrue prior to the entry of an adverse judgment settlement or dismissal of the underlying action in which plaintiff has become entangled due to the purportedly negligent advice of his attorney
E. recognizing the cause of action
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.