Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
and did not schedule her for any work on Saturdays. (Pl.’s Mem. of Law at 4). Indeed, Dr. Eckstein’s proffered position at Beth Israel was conditioned upon her receiving Sabbath observance accommodation like that which she had at NYU. (Id.) In order to prevail over defendants’ summary judgment motions, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case by showing that the facts surrounding defendants’ refusal to hire her give rise to an inference of religious discrimination. Stetson v. NYNEX Service Co., 995 F.2d 355, 359-360 (2d Cir.1993). Because defendants offered the same position to someone else with similar religious practices, an inference of discrimination cannot be drawn from their refusal to hire plaintiff. See, e.g., E.E.O.C. v. Wiltel, Inc., 81 F.3d 1508 (10th Cir.1996) ; Eng v. Beth Israel Medical Center, 93 Civ
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that plaintiff could not establish prima facie case of discrimination where plaintiff failed to meet minimum qualifications for job
B. holding that plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case in a religious discrimination suit because among other reasons employer hired someone else with identical religious practices
C. holding that replacement by someone outside the protected group is required to make a prima facie age discrimination case
D. holding that a plaintiff had not established a prima facie case of race discrimination because she failed to show valid comparators and presented no other circumstantial evidence of discrimination
E. holding to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination a plaintiff must show he 1
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.