Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
plain meaning of a clear statutory text. We therefore hold that the clear text of § 2713 creates a mandatory condition precedent barring all OPA claims unless and until a claimant has presented her claims in compliance with § 2713(a) and either: (1) all responsible parties deny all liability; or (2) the claim is not settled by payment within 90 days after (A) the claim was presented, or (B) advertising was begun under section 2714(b) of the Act, whichever is later. 33 U.S.C.A. § 2713(c). C. Consequence of Dismissal All parties agree that the district court’s dismissal should not be treated as a dismissal with prejudice. Appellants remain free to refile this action, if and when they comply with OPA’s claims presentation procedure. See also Hallstrom, 493 U.S. at 31-33, 110 S.Ct. at 312 . Cf. United States v. Daniel Good Real
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that rcras notice provision is a condition precedent to all claims
B. holding agreed abatement to allow compliance with 60day notice requirement of section 74051a did not extend 120day deadline or constitute an agreement of the parties to extend
C. holding that after dismissal plaintiffs may refile suit after compliance with rcras 60day notice requirement
D. holding that substantial compliance with notice is sufficient
E. holding that plaintiffs were entitled to vacate final order of dismissal as void when they did not receive the motion for dismissal or notice of the hearing on the order until after the dismissal was entered
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.