Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
affairs that did not include the regulatory scheme, and therefore, Defendant cannot claim any adverse impact to his investment expectations. Loveladies Harbor Inc. v. United States, 28 F.3d 1171, 1177 (Fed.Cir.1994). With respect to the final factor concerning the “character of the government action,” the Court concludes that this factor weighs against a conclusion that the Government’s regulation in this case amounts to a taking. In considering the character of the government action, courts consider (1) the extent to which the action is retroactive, and (2) whether the action targets a particular individual. In this case, the Act is not being applied retroactively, and Defendant has not demonstrated that he is being singled out for application of the Act. See Brace, 72 Fed.Cl. at 356 . Accordingly, the Court concludes that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that an owners opinion testimony on the value of his property cannot be based on naked conjecture or solely speculative factors
B. recognizing the potential for discrimination by local officials among similarly situated property owners who are underrepresented in the general population
C. holding that all property owners affected by a residential use permit are necessary parties
D. recognizing that individuals are generally not similarly situated when different decision makers are involved in the respective disciplinary action
E. recognizing that act and wetlands regulations are generally applicable to all similarly situated property owners and cannot be viewed as being directed solely at the plaintiffs
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.