Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
previously, plaintiffs interests can and should be adequately protected in the state proceeding given the substantial similarity of the state proceeding to the federal one. Thus, this factor also weighs in favor of abstention. g. Vexatious and reactive nature of the federal claim The Supreme Court recognized that the “vexatious or reactive nature of either the federal or the state litigation may influence the decision whether to defer to a parallel state litigation under Colorado River. ” Cone, 460 U.S. at 17, 103 S.Ct. 927. Where courts find bad faith on the part of plaintiff, a stay or dismissal may be warranted “as a means to deter vexatious use of the courts.” Holland, 840 F.Supp. at 1101; see also Baseline Sports, Inc. v. Third Base Sports, 341 F.Supp.2d 605, 611-612 (E.D.Va.2004) . In the instant case, Livingston and Winn
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a developers claim for breach of fiduciary duty was actually a contract action properly brought in the court of claims
B. holding that district court has no jurisdiction when an action is brought before the first final denial occurs
C. holding that plaintiff brought its claim to district court for a vexatious purpose when the claim was a mirror image of the state court action
D. holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the purported state law claim for violation of the automatic stay and that any such claim could be brought only in bankruptcy court only
E. holding state immune from suit brought in state court
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.