Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
upon the relationship, if any, between the two debts. Additionally, the July 2000 notice of this debt was sent before the Secretary had taken any action with regard to Mrs. Edwards’ May 2000 submissions. Nevertheless, the Secretary treated the $2,366 and $12,347 overpay-ments as separate matters throughout the proceedings. In this case, whether Mrs. Edwards’ May 2000 submissions could be considered a waiver request of both debts becomes relevant if, and only if, the May 2000 submissions, individually or collectively, are deemed to be a request for waiver. Thus, this issue is interrelated with the matter being remanded. Under these circumstances, the matter will be remanded for consideration by the Board in the first instance. See Maggitt v. West, 202 F.3d 1370, 1377-78 (Fed.Cir.2000) . III. REMAND On remand, Mrs. Edwards may
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that this court has discretion to hear arguments presented to it in the first instance provided that it otherwise has jurisdiction over the claim
B. holding arguments not raised on appeal waived
C. holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
D. holding that this court lacked jurisdiction to hear a cue claim raised for the first time on appeal
E. holding that the court has discretion to hear or to remand legal arguments raised for the first time on appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.