Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
while we have held that “temporary swelling and irritation” constitute only de minimis injury under Norman, see Taylor v. McDuffie, 155 F.3d 479, 484 (4th Cir.1998), overruled in part by Wilkins, 559 U.S. 34, 130 S.Ct. 1175 (2010), we have also recognized that to satisfy Norman an inmate “néed not show that ... force caused an ‘extreme deprivation’ or ‘serious’ or ‘significant’ pain or injury.” Williams v. Benjamin, 77 F.3d 756, 761 (4th Cir.1996) (quoting Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 9, 112 S.Ct. 995, 117 L.Ed.2d 156 (1992)). Moreover, on numerous occasions, applying the Norman standard, we have concluded that injuries comparable to — and arguably less severe than — those Ussery maintains he suffered were not de minimis. See, e.g., Orem v. Rephann, 523 F.3d 442, 448 (4th Cir.2008) ; Young v. Prince George’s Cnty., 355 F.3d 751,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the prison litigation reform act requires a prior showing of physical injury that need not be significant but must be more than de minimis 
B. holding plaintiff failed to meet de minimis burden where he introduced only two isolated comments made by individuals who had no involvement in his termination
C. holding that just two uses of a taser  even if only for a few seconds at a time  caused more than de minimis injury when the plaintiff experieneed electric shock pain and developed a scar
D. holding that to demonstrate retaliation complainedof action must be more than de minimis 
E. holding that a plaintiff may recover damages for emotional distress caused by observing the negligently inflicted injury of a third person if but only if said plaintiff 1 is closely related to the injury victim 2 is present at the scene of the injury producing event at the time it occurs and is then aware that it is causing injury to the victim and 3 as a result suffers serious emotional distress
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.