Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
112 F.Supp.2d 681, 687 (N.D.Ohio 2000) (citing Perkins v. Wilkinson Sword, Inc., 83 Ohio St.3d 507, 700 N.E.2d 1247 (1998)). In making such a determination, O.R.C. § 2307.75(B) sets forth a number of factors to consider in determining the foreseeable risks associated with the design of a product, and O.R.C. § 2307.75(C) sets forth a number of factors to consider in determining the benefits of a particular design. Here, in support of the design defect claim, Plaintiff alleges that the risks of the reservoir design outweighed its benefits, especially considering the availability of alternative, safer designs. (Doc. 1). The Court finds that such allegations sufficiently assert a defective design claim under O.R.C. § 2307.75. See Boroff v. Alza Carp., 685 F.Supp.2d 704 (N.D.Ohio 2010) . Defendants’ contention that the claim in this
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding the death penalty excessive punishment for the crime of rape
B. holding that the material and moral damages caused by the unlawful death of a human being may affect several persons and in such case each acquires an independent action against the person causing the unlawful death
C. holding that if a trial court has rejected death as a possible sentence double jeopardy bars the state from seeking the death penalty at resentencing even where rejection of the death sentence was based on a legal error
D. holding that if death results requirement under  241was satisfied because death was a foreseeable and natural result of defendants actions
E. holding that allegations that duragesic has been recalled for causing death to users due to an excessive leak of fentanyl a dangerous narcotic medication into the skin and that this sort of leakage caused the death at issue  is enough to give rise to a plausible inference that the foreseeable risks associated with duragesics design or formulation outweighed its benefits
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.