Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
that will trigger heightened federal substantive due process protection from statutory sex offender registration schemes. See Cutshall v. Sundquist, 193 F.3d 466, 479 (6th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1053, 120 S.Ct. 1554, 146 L.Ed.2d 460 (2000); Doe v. Pataki, 3 F.Supp.2d 456, 467 (S.D.N.Y.1998); Russell v. Gregoire, 124 F.3d 1079, 1094 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied sub nom. Russell v. Gregoire, 523 U.S. 1007, 118 S.Ct. 1191, 140 L.Ed.2d 321 (1998); E.B. v. Verniero, 119 F.3d 1077, 1102-04 (3rd Cir.1997), cert. denied sub nom. W.P. v. Verniero, 522 U.S. 1109, 118 S.Ct. 1039, 140 L.Ed.2d 105 (1998); Artway v. Attorney Gen. of New Jersey, 81 F.3d 1235, 1268-69 (3rd Cir.1996); see also Conn. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. Doe, 538 U.S. 1, 6, 123 S.Ct. 1160, 1164, 155 L.Ed.2d 98 (2003) ; Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693, 712, 96 S.Ct.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that although the parking citation that the plaintiff received did not indicate where and how to contest the allegation the plaintiff was not deprived of procedural due process because he received a summons to appear in court via first class mail before he was deprived of any liberty interest
B. holding inmate sentenced under the 1998 act enjoys liberty interest in receiving mandatory sex offender treatment and is entitled to due process protections before treatment can be withheld
C. holding that a prisoner cannot be deprived of a protected liberty interest in goodtime credits without procedural due process
D. holding that because process is not an end in itself once a court has found that the petitioner does not have a valid liberty interest a challenge to both procedural and substantive due process must fail
E. holding convicted sex offender had not been deprived of liberty interest for purposes of procedural due process challenge to sorp
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.