Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
in their capacity as Trustees of the Family Trust. Nonetheless, Sternberg contends that the Olsons waived any defects in service of process and jurisdiction. Pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(1), the defenses of insufficiency of service of process and lack of personal jurisdiction are waived by failure to raise them in either a motion to dismiss filed under the rule or in the answer. In the present case, however, the Olsons never filed any motions or responsive pleadings but rather, allowed a default judgment to be entered against them. Because they never entered an appearance in the original action in their capacities as Trustees of the Family Trust, they did not waive the defenses of deficient process and lack of jurisdiction. Compare Smith v. Arnold, 4 Mass.App.Ct. 614, 616 (1976) . Accordingly, the Judgment and Order of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that defendant did not waive his special appearance by filing a motion for new trial subject to the special appearance
B. holding that party waived special appearance
C. holding that defendant did not waive special appearance
D. holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts
E. holding that where the defendant filed a special appearance to challenge the courts jurisdiction over his person he was bound by the courts determination and could not relitigate it
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.