Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Co., 378 U.S. 441, 449-58, 84 S.Ct. 1738, 12 L.Ed.2d 953 (1964)(rejecting the plaintiffs attempt to place glass and metal containers in different relevant markets based on different characteristics). News America points to ample evidence in the record supporting its contention that the consumers of at-shelf coupon dispensers do in fact view at-shelf coupon dispensers as reasonably interchangeable with other in-store marketing vehicles, despite the fact that each in-store marketing vehicle may have its own unique advantages and features. Based on the record presented, the Court cannot accept Menasha’s definition of a relevant market limited to at-shelf coupon dispensers. See Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209, 242, 113 S.Ct. 2578, 125 L.Ed.2d 168 (1993). Because Menasha has failed to provide a
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that if an experts opinion is dependent upon information that is inaccurate or lacks support in the record it is deemed incompetent
B. holding that an experts opinion must be based on facts in evidence or within his or her knowledge and that the admission of an experts opinion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion
C. holding that it is not the courts role to decide whether an experts opinion is correct
D. holding even though experts are permitted to give an opinion they may not offer an opinion regarding the credibility of others
E. holding that when an experts opinion regarding the relevant market is not supported by sufficient facts or when the record contradicts or renders the opinion unreasonable it cannot support a jurys verdict
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.