Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Tatarinov did not contest that fact, the Oregon Court of Appeals declined to correct the error. Id. at 81. Tatarinov sought habeas relief in federal court, but the district court denied his petition. The adequate and independent state ground doctrine bars federal courts from considering a federal constitutional argument on habeas review if “a state court declined to address a prisoner’s federal claims because the prisoner had failed to meet a state procedural requirement.” Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 730, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991). The Oregon Court of Appeals rejected Ta-tarinov’s claim based on its consideration of the equitable interests of the parties in his case, which is independent of federal law. See Nitschke v. Belleque, 680 F.3d 1105, 1108 (9th Cir.2012) . The Oregon plain error rule is also an
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding plain error analysis is the proper standard for review of forfeited error in the rule 11 context
B. holding that the courts review is conducted under the plain error standard
C. holding that plain error analysis is the proper standard for review of forfeited error in the rule 11 context
D. holding that oregons plain error review is independent of state law
E. holding that any error was harmless and thus not plain error
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.