Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
afforded the plan’s administrator discretion in determining eligibility payments, and thus, an ar bitrary and capricious standard of review applied to the administrator’s decision to terminate benefit payments. Id. at 505. Likewise, in Donato v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 19 F.3d 375 (7th Cir.1994), the Seventh Circuit found that the language “upon receipt of proof’; “[a]ll proof must be satisfactory to us”; and “must describe the event, the nature and the extent of the cause for which a claim is mad rd of review applies. The fact that the plan’s language does not contain an explicit grant of discretionary authority to the plan’s administrator is irrelevant. Id.; Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis v. SwedishAmerican Group Health Benefit Trust, 901 F.2d 1369, 1371 (7th Cir.1990) . Moreover, the Seventh Circuit has repeatedly
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that magic words conveying discretion are unnecessary
B. holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion
C. holding that a jury could find an intent to discriminate from evidence of use of code words such as all of you and one of them the words themselves are only relevant for what they reveal  the intent of the speaker
D. recognizing that the court must give meaning to all the words in the claims
E. holding that if words of statute are unambiguous there is no room for judicial construction
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.