Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
333 U.S. 426, 431, 68 S.Ct. 641, 644, 92 L.Ed. 784 (1948)); see also Castle v. Sangamo Weston, Inc., 837 F.2d 1550, 1563 (11th Cir.1988) (explaining grant or denial of equitable relief lies in the discretion of the district court). Mandamus, which is an extreme form of equitable relief, “is a writ designed to require an official to perform an act required by law.” See Corn v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 904 F.2d 585, 587 (11th Cir.1990). Although the writ of mandamus was abolished by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 81(b), federal courts “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2000); see also Armstrong v. Martin Marietta Corp., 138 F.3d 1374, 1385 (11th Cir.1998) (en banc) . Pursuant to their powers under 28 U.S.C. §
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion
B. holding that to grant a writ of mandamus a court in the exercise of its discretion must be satisfied that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances
C. recognizing the writ of mandamus may issue to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the failure to carry out a ministerial task
D. recognizing that the issuance of a writ of mandamus is itself generally a matter of discretion
E. recognizing that laches is a proper ground for refusing to issue a writ of mandamus
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.