Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Barman, D.O., and Richard I. Malamut, M.D.), a Crozer-Chester nurse (Nora Marden, R.N.), Joan K. Richards, the president of Crozer-Chester, and John and Jane Doe, a physician and an attorney, respectively. Because our analysis is the same for all of the defendants, we will refer to them collectively as "defendants.” 3 . Defendants set forth many arguments for why we should dismiss Dr. Klavan’s state law claims; however, because of our determination that the defendants are not state actors and our decision to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Dr. Klavan s state law claims, we will not address those arguments. 4 . The Supreme Court's 1982 “Lugar trilogy” guides our “state action” inquiry. See Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922, 102 S.Ct. 2744, 73 L.Ed.2d 482 (1982) ; Rendell-Baker v. Kohn, 457 U.S. 830, 102
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a state agency created under state law was a state actor
B. holding that the state police is a state agency
C. holding that a creditors joint participation with the state in a prejudgment attachment transformed the creditor into a state actor for the debtors  1983 claims challenging the validity of the state statutes but not for the creditors alleged misuse of the statutes because that conduct could not be attributed to the state
D. holding that private misuse of a state statute does not describe conduct that can be attributed to the state
E. holding that the creditor did not satisfy the foregoing requirement because it was trying to exercise the avoidance power for itself as a sole creditor not for the benefit of the debtors estate or the creditors as a whole
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.