Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Rights Practices in Sri Lanka indicates that repercussions of the war continue to impact human rights in Sri Lanka, particularly for Tamils such as Sabaratnam. U.S. Dep’t of State, Sri Lanka, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2010 (2011), available at http://www. state.gov/g/dr]/rls/hrrpt/2010/sca/154486. htm; see also Hoxhallari v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 179, 186 n. 5 (2d Cir.2006) (providing that the Court “may always exercise independent discretion to take judicial notice of any further changes in a country’s politics that occurred between the time of the BIA’s determination decision and [the Court’s] review”). Furthermore, on remand, the agency may decide that Sabaratnam is entitled to nunc pro tunc relief. See Xue Yong Zhang v. Holder, 617 F.3d 650, 665 & n. 13 (2d Cir.2010)  (internal quotation marks and citations
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that summary judgment may be reversed when it is based on an error of law
B. recognizing that an award of nunc pro tunc may in an appropriate circumstance be granted as a means of rectifying error in immigration proceedings and that when a matter is adjudicated nunc pro tunc it is as if it were done as of the time that it should have been done
C. holding that it may not
D. holding that it may be decided as a matter of law
E. holding that it is not
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.