Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
at 467 (describing the practical problems that would ensue if tolling were not permitted in opt-in class actions). It also would place on the court the burden of timing class certification and implementing opt-in procedures in such a way as to make sure that the limitations period was met. This would be virtually impossible in cases such as this, where suit was filed late in the period. See, Brief of Amici Curiae Larry J. Rhutasel et al. at 11-12 (unintentional procedural delays in ruling on class certification would terminate putative class members’ claims if tolling did not permit putative members to opt in to a representative suit after the statute of limitations had run). Such a holding also would create an anomalous difference 8, 139-140, 127 S.Ct. 764, 166 L.Ed.2d 604 (2007) . Finally, we agree with the reasoning of the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that congress intended to adopt a standard more stringent than the prepslra second circuit standard
B. recognizing the circuit split and applying the subjective standard as more stringent without deciding which standard applies
C. recognizing that the federal pleading standard is a less stringent standard than the delaware pleading standard
D. holding that terry  parental unfitness  standard is more stringent than the dependency best interests standard
E. holding that the standard for assessing whether a justiciable controversy exists should not be more stringent in lawsuits seeking a declaration of patent invalidity or noninfringement than in nonpatent fields
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.