Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Just as this court should "respect and carefully weigh the views of other circuits,” United States v. Stone, 9 F.3d 934, 941 (11th Cir.1993), a district court should do likewise. However, only the decisions of the Supreme Court and this court are binding on the district courts of this circuit. 16 . It should also be noted that the caselaw is replete with opinions that conflict with the standard asserted by the Growers. In many cases involving the FLSA, courts found that a certain item, which was obviously not directly connected to the performance of the employee’s principal activity, was nevertheless primarily for the benefit of the employer. See, e.g., Brennan v. Modern Chevrolet Co., 363 F.Supp. 327, 333 (N.D.Tex.1973), aff'd, 491 F.2d 1271 (5th Cir.1974) (affirming without opinion) ; Masters v. Md. Mgmt. Co., 493 F.2d 1329,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the amendment was a use regulation which was in effect a condition on the use of property in the affected zone
B. holding evidence which established that use of property was permissive showed use of property was not adverse
C. holding that car salesmans use of an automobile was primarily for the benefit of the employer even though 90 of mileage was for personal use
D. holding that the defendant failed to demonstrate legitimate expectation of privacy where he could not show that he had the owners permission to use the car or demonstrate prior use or control of the car
E. holding that the driver of a car who had permission to use the car had standing to challenge its search
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.