Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
b]ut to use that leverage to project those royalty payments beyond the life of the patent is analogous to an effort to enlarge the monopoly of the patent.” 379 U.S. at 33, 85 S.Ct. 176 (emphasis added). But as both Congress and the Court have come to recognize, it may not be possible to exercise any leverage at all from a patent, if that patent does not confer any market power upon its owner. See Ill. Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28, 42, 126 S.Ct. 1281, 164 L.Ed.2d 26 (2006) (noting that Congress did not intend the mere existence of a patent to constitute the requisite “market power” for purposes of patent misuse and coming to the same conclusion for antitrust purposes); see also Aronson v. Quick Point Pencil Co., 440 U.S. 257, 99 S.Ct. 1096, 59 L.Ed.2d 296 (1979) . The Federal Circuit’s decision in Windsurfing
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it was not against public policy to enforce an agreement providing for deferred royalties on an invention whether or not a patent was ultimately granted
B. holding in a patent infringement case that plaintiff lacked standing where it held a conditional right to license a patent and enforce license agreements but did not have the right to transfer the patent
C. holding that an assignment or sale of rights in the invention and potential patent rights is not a sale of the invention within the meaning of section 102b
D. recognizing a public policy against discrimination but not providing for an independent cause of action
E. holding patent policy incorporated by reference into patent agreement
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.