Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) (document no. 7). Dwyer already amended her complaint once as of right. The United States objects. Standard of Review The United States’ 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is predicated on the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 2680(a). If the exception applies, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case. See id.; Magee v. United States, 121 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir.1997). Therefore, the court must resolve the 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss first, before undertaking a summary judgment analysis on the merits of the plaintiffs claim. See Williams v. United States, 50 F.3d 299, 304-05 (4th Cir.1995); see also United States v. Swiss Am. Bank, 191 F.3d 30, 46 (1st Cir.1999) ; Miller v. George Arpin & Sons, Inc., 949
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that consideration of summary judgment motion should await determination of jurisdiction
B. holding that a grant of summary judgment in favor of one party creates a final judgment allowing appellate review of denial of opposing partys summary judgment motion
C. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that a motion for summary judgment was not opposed
D. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that motion for summary judgment was not opposed
E. holding that a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment precluded default judgment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.