Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the insurer’s position is ‘reasonable and legitimate.’ ” Thompson v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co., 875 F.2d 1460, 1462 (10th Cir.1989) (quoting Manis v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 681 P.2d 760, 762 (Okla.1984)). After carefully reviewing the parties’ briefs, the record, and relevant Oklahoma authorities, we believe that no reasonable jury could have concluded that State Farm’s evaluation and settlement offers constituted bad faith under this standard. First, we note that State Farm’s initial settlement offer was within the range it assigned to Mr. Roberts’ claim. Thus, we are not presented with the situation where an insurer has offered to settle a dispute in an amount below the range assigned to the claim by the insurer’s own investigation. See Newport v. USAA, 11 P.3d 190, 196-197 (Okla.2000) . Moreover, because we have determined that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that an insurer has a duty to conduct an investigation reasonably appropriate under the circumstances
B. recognizing the wide latitude counsel must have in making tactical decisions and that strategic choices made after less than complete investigation may be reasonable if reasonable professional judgments support the limitations on investigation
C. holding there can be no claim for bad faith when an insurer has promptly denied a claim that is in fact not covered
D. holding that after a reasonable investigation an insurer must promptly settle a claim for the value or within the range assigned to the claim as a result of its investigation
E. holding the insurer liable for failing to settle the claim when time was of the essence
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.