Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
inquiry, then, the Board had no reason to consider the absence of enforcement. Finally, Guardsmark argues that the Board erred, by failing to consider the chain-of-command rule’s purpose, namely “to establish a method for efficiently reporting problems and having problems resolved- [in order .to] maintain an orderly work progression and resolve problems in a prompt manner.” Guardsmark’s Opening Br. 15. Although efficient resolution of disputes - may well represent a valid business purpose, Guardsmark never argued, neither here nor before the Board, that this purpose represents a special circumstance necessary to employee discipline or company production. Cf. Stanford Hosp.; 325 F.3d at 338 (citing Beth Israel Hosp. v. NLRB, 437 U.S. 483, 492-93, 98 S.Ct. 2463, 57 L.Ed.2d 370 (1978)) . Nor did the company argue, as it must to
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the federal expert witness compensation rules are in direct conflict with the state rules even when the state rules allow for a greater recovery
B. holding that even in a public forum the government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time place or manner of protected speech provided the restrictions are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech that they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest and that they leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information
C. holding that in the context of solicitation rules such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time
D. holding that a quick look analysis was inappropriate for restrictions imposed by professional association of dentists on member advertising where the likelihood of noncompetitive effects of restrictions were not obvious and restrictions could plausibly be thought to have procompetitive effect on competition
E. holding that reasoning which would justify the arrest by the search and at the same time justify the search by the arrest  will not do
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.