Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the CHINS determinations. Thus, we remand for the trial court to make proper findings and conclusions in support of its judgment. Affirmed in part and remanded with instructions. MATHIAS, J., and BRADFORD, J., concur. 1 . The parties do not indicate, nor could we find in the Appendices, when the children were first placed with Father during the course of the CHINS proceedings. 2 . The allegation was based on a local newspaper article, which reported that Father's attorney had been named as the Logansport city attorney and the GAL had been named as the deputy city attorney. 3 . On April 11, 2007, the trial court entered its "Order Terminating Wardship.” Appellant’s App. at 126. But that order does not render the appeal moot. See Roark v. Roark, 551 N.E.2d 865, 868 (Ind.Ct.App.1990) . 4 . Mother also alleges, in passing, that the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the determination is an equitable one
B. holding that the fact that the sale may not be fully consummated does not prevent a determination that the appeal is moot because section 363m does not require the purchaser to take irreversible steps consummating the sale before the absence of a stay will render an appeal moot
C. holding that when the consequences of the conviction are not severe and imminent an appeal is moot when the judgment is voluntarily satisfied
D. holding an appeal from a chins determination after termination of the chins case is not moot because of the potentially devastating consequences of a chins determination
E. holding expired domestic violence restraining order not moot because of collateral legal consequences such as consideration in custody determination and nonlegal collateral consequences such as reputational harm
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.