Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
(citing Sahadi v. Reynolds Chem., 636 F.2d 1116, 1117 (6th Cir. 1980)); see also Lilley v. BTM Corp., 958 F.2d 746, 752 (6th Cir.1992) (“Spreading the former duties of a terminated employee among the remaining employees does not constitute replacement.”). Novotny’s reliance on this argument, therefore, is misplaced. Novotny also argues that she was treated differently than similarly situated males. Novotny’s argument in support of this statement is difficult to follow. Novotny appears to argue two distinct claims: 1) a pre-termination claim of discrimination, and 2) a claim of discrimination related to her termination. The Court reviews each of these claims. Novotny first asserts that she was discriminated against prior to her termination. Novotny claims that her calend th Cir.1996) ; Agnew v. BASF Corp., 286 F.3d 307, 310-11
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a negative criticism or performance evaluation unaccompanied by a materially adverse change in the terms or conditions of employment does not constitute adverse employment action
B. holding that an employee accepted as a matter of law changes to an employment agreement by continuing employment with the company after he received notice of the changes
C. holding that reassignments without salary or work changes do not ordinarily constitute adverse employment decisions in employment discrimination claims
D. holding that termination is an adverse employment action
E. holding that poor evaluations alone do not constitute an adverse employment action
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.