Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
See also Bus. Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enter., Inc., 498 U.S. 533, 554, 111 S.Ct. 922, 112 L.Ed.2d 1140 (1991) (affirming the imposition of sanctions on a represented party, sophisticated in prosecuting copyright infringement actions, who had through its officers signed a pleading in violation of Rule 11 certification requirements); Project 74 Allentown, Inc. v. Frost, 143 F.R.D. 77, 83 n. 7 (E.D.Pa.1992), aff'd, 998 F.2d 1004 (3d Cir.1993) (noting that Rule 11 permits a court “to sanction the individual who signed a paper on behalf of a corporation as well as the corporation itself’); Calloway v. Marvel Entm’t Group, 854 F.2d 1452, 1475 (2d Cir.1988), rev’d sub nom., Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entm’t Group, 493 U.S. 120, 110 S.Ct. 456, 107 L.Ed.2d 438 (1989) . Neither Jazz nor Benun has identified any
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a criminal defendant is entitled to know the charges against him and to be tried solely upon the charges against him internal quotation marks and citation omitted
B. holding that an order imposing sanctions against an attorney for one of the parties in a pending case is final and therefore immediately appealable by the attorney
C. holding that where the party does know that the filing and signing is sic wrongful and the attorney reasonably should know then sanctions against both are appropriate
D. holding that it is always appropriate to assume that our elected representatives like other citizens know the law
E. recognizing that each party to a contract has a duty to read and familiarize himself with its contents  and generally is presumed to know the terms of the agreement
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.