Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
benefits calculated under the Minimum Benefit Formulas, the amendment actually decreases the dollar amount of the participant’s net annuity- 16 . Plaintiffs have brought their § 1024(b)(4) claim pursuant to both 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3) (which provides for injunctive relief) and 29 U.S.C. § 1132(c) (which gives the court discretion to impose civil penalties on a plan administrator in certain circumstances). In their Reply in support of their Motion to Dismiss, Defendants argue that the court may not as a matter of law impose civil penalties under 29 U.S.C. 1132(c) on the plan administrator for a § 1024(b)(4) violation. Plaintiffs have not had a chance to respond to this argument, and the Court will not consider it at this time. See Carroll v. Nakatani, 342 F.3d 934, 942 (9th Cir.2003) . 17 . Unlike prior SPDs, the 2000 Honeywell
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that issues which are not specifically and distinctly argued and raised a partys opening brief are waived
B. holding that arguments not raised in the opening brief are waived
C. holding that a court need not review arguments not specifically and distinctly raised in a partys opening brief
D. holding that issues not argued specifically and distinctly in a partys opening brief are waived internal quotation marks and citations omitted
E. holding that issues not specifically raised and argued in a partys opening brief are waived
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.