Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
$50-$70. 363 F.3d at 202. We held that the interstate commerce nexus was satisfied because the tavern sold beer that was manufactured outside of the Virgin Islands. Id at 211. Likewise, in United States v. Claus have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. See Raich, 545 U.S. at 17-19, 125 S.Ct. 2195. Although this robbery was of a small business that purchased alcohol sold in interstate commerce, if robberies oc curred at and led to the closure of such establishments on a large scale, the effect on interstate commerce would be substantial. For that reason, the size of Jeanette’s business and the fact that the appellants stole only $121 dollars, a wallet, and two cell phones did not make this crime too small to satisfy the de minimis standard. See Walker, 657 F.3d at 180 ; Haywood, 363 F.3d at 202, 211 n. 7 (holding
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing de novo standard of review
B. holding that fiveday suspension was not a de minimis deprivation
C. holding that district court properlydiscounted four calls as de minimis
D. holding that a robbery of 40 to 50 satisfied the de minimis standard
E. holding that to demonstrate retaliation complainedof action must be more than de minimis 
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.