Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
property at the time of his bankruptcy filing, which in that case was less than the $7500 homestead exemption. Id. at 115-116. To determine the value of the debtor’s equity, the court subtracted the amount of the other unavoidable liens from the fair market value of the property determined as of time of the bankruptcy filing. Id. at 116. Although the Third Circuit opinion did not expressly acknowledge what the result would be if the amount of the debtor’s equity exceeded the value of the $7500 homestead exemption, the Bankruptcy Court decision had recognized that the debtor could avoid the lien only to the lesser of the amount of the value of his equity or of the amount of his homestead exemption. 160 B.R. 524, 525-26 (Bankr.D.N.J.1993); see also In re Arevalo, supra, 142 B.R. at 115 ; cf. In re Abrahimzadeh, 162 B.R. 676, 680
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a chapter 13 debtor had standing to avoid a judgment lien to the extent of her exemption amount but not the entire judgment lien
B. holding that debtor could not avoid a judicial lien where after accounting for unavoidable liens and mortgages he had no equity in the property and therefore no interest on which to avoid the judicial lien
C. holding that  522f1 requires a debtor to have possessed an interest to which a lien attached before it attached to avoid the fixing of the lien on that interest
D. holding that a state tax lien was not judicial lien arising from judgment such that it could be avoided in bankruptcy by a chapter 13 debtor
E. holding state courts authority under iowa code section 59821 not the lien created there under prevented debtor from claiming the iowa homestead exemption and therefore the debtor could not avoid the lien because the lien did not impair an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled but for the lien
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.