Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
in trade, not unfair practices in general. Apart from claims of unfair competition, a plaintiff must allege some sort of transaction between the parties for liability to attach under sections two and eleven. See Cash Energy, 768 F.Supp. at 894; see also Reisman v. KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, 965 F.Supp. 165, 175, n. 14 (D.Mass.1997) (noting that plaintiff and defendant must be engaged in business relationship for claim to lie under Chapter 93A § 11); John Boyd Co. v. Boston Gas Co., 775 F.Supp. 435, 440 (D.Mass.1991) (noting that Supreme Judicial Court “has stressed the existence of some contractual or business relationship between the parties as a precursor to liability under Chapter 93A”); Standard Register Co. v. Bolton-Emerson, Inc., 38 Mass.App.Ct. 545, 551, 649 N.E.2d 791 (1995)  This is the “common thread” of 93A cases. Cash
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an individual debtor not engaged in business is eligible for chapter 11
B. holding that where there was no evidence of the claimed underlying violation and where there were no unique arguments related to the chapter 93a claim defendant was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs chapter 93a claim
C. holding that the issue of fraud was precluded because the previous jury necessarily considered fraud as the basis for chapter 93a liability
D. holding that to maintain claim for fraud under chapter 93a  11 parties need not be in privity of contract so long as they are engaged in more than a minor or insignificant business relationship
E. holding that summary judgment on chapter 93a claim is appropriate when summary judgment is granted on fraud claim and chapter 93a claim is solely based on the underlying claim for common law fraud
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.