Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
states, or the laws of only four states, in resolving the illegal gambling claims. (The plaintiffs contend that the court need apply only the laws of California (where Teleline’s home office was located), Illinois (where some calls were answered and a relevant AT&T facility was located), New Jersey (where a relevant AT&T office was located), and Missouri (where most of the calls were answered).) The district court unequivocally ruled that the gambling laws of all fifty states would have to be applied: "In order to eliminate any confusion, I now conclude that the laws of each state from which a call was made ... will be used to evaluate the gambling claims in this litigation.” Appellant AT&T agrees with the district court's determination on choice of law; its only content Cir.1986) ; see also Harbor Tug & Barge, Inc, v. Belcher
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that in the absence of a crossappeal an appellee may urge affirmance of the lower courts ruling on any basis appearing in the record but may not attack the decree with a view either to enlarging his own rights thereunder or of lessening the rights of his adversary internal quotation marks omitted
B. holding that the failure to file a petition for crossappeal within the statutory time limit is a jurisdictional defect that bars the court from hearing the crossappeal
C. holding that the crossappeal time limit is jurisdictional
D. holding that an appellee who did not address an argument in the answering brief had waived that issue
E. holding that failure of an appellee to crossappeal ordinarily precludes review where an appellee seeks to enlarge his rights or lessen those of an adversary but is not a jurisdictional bar
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.