Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
(“We allow the admission of survey evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule if the survey is material, more probative on the issue than other evidence and if it has guarantees of trustworthiness.” (citations omitted) (internal quotations omitted)), C.A. May Marine Supply Co. v. Brunswick Corp., 649 F.2d 1049, 1054 (5th Cir.1981) (“Surveys and customer questionnaires are admissible, if they are pertinent to the inquiry, upon a showing that the poll is reliable and was compiled in accordance with accepted survey methods.”), Baumholser v. Amax Coal Co., 630 F.2d 550, 552 (7th Cir.1980) (“To qualify a study or opinion poll for admission into evidence, there must be a substantial showing of reliability.”), and Pittsburgh Press Club v. United States, 579 F.2d 751, 758 (3d Cir.1978) . Courts have, however, rarely articulated
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that testimonial statements are subject to the requirements of the confrontation clause even if they are otherwise admissible under the hearsay exception for excited utterances
B. holding that when regulations are intended to have different purposes and are not dependent on each other they are not intertwined
C. holding that surveys are admissible only if they are conducted with proper safeguards to insure accuracy and reliability
D. holding that the remedy under another subsection of  1581 is not manifestly inadequate because  1581s builtin safeguards and limitations    are not to be dismissed because they are inconvenient
E. holding that claims are related if they involve a common core of facts or they are based on related legal theories
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.