Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
an applicable guideline”); United States v. Gonzalez, 134 Fed.Appx. 595, 598 (3d Cir.2005) ("Although the Sentencing Guidelines are not mandatory, sentences within the prescribed range are presumptively reasonable.”); United States v. Bartram, 407 F.3d 307, 313 (4th Cir.2005) (defining "reasonable under ordinary English usage as: being in agreement with right thinking or right judgment”); United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir.2005) ("[I]t will be rare for a reviewing court to say ... a sentence [within a properly calculated Guidelines range] is ‘unreasonable.’ ”); United States v. Webb, 403 F.3d 373, 385 n. 9 (6th Cir.2005) ("[W]e decline to hold that a sentence within a proper Guidelines range is per se reasonable.”); United States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606 (7th Cir.2005) ; United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that we may apply a presumption of reasonableness to a sentence within the guidelines range
B. holding that sentence within guidelines range enjoys a presumption of reasonableness
C. holding that a sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range is presumptively reasonable
D. holding that any sentence that is properly calculated under the guidelines is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness
E. holding that guidelines create a rebuttable presumption
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.