Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
claims are subject to abandonment pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.158(a).... [T]he Secretary correctly argues that appellant’s contention is without legal merit because the abandonment pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.158(a) cannot be set aside or waived on grounds of alleged ignorance of regulatory requirements. The Supreme Court has held that everyone dealing with the Government is charged with knowledge of federal statutes and lawfully promulgated agency regulations. Fed. Crop Ins. Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, 384-85, 68 S.Ct. 1, 3, 92 L.Ed. 10 (1947). Thus, regulations are binding on all who seek to come within their sphere, “regardless of actual knowledge of what is in the [r]egulations or o emonstrate reliance on the allegedly defective denial notices.”); Burks-Marshall, 7 F.3d at 1349 . In light of the above discussion, the Court
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the appellant developed his argument sufficiently to raise the issue for appellate review
B. holding that the prisoner has the burden of demonstrating he has exhausted his administrative remedies in his complaint
C. holding that our court will not consider an issue of whether a defendant has standing to seek suppression of evidence if the issue was not raised in the lower court
D. holding that an appellant has no standing to raise a due process issue where he has not shown that the alleged deficiency in the notice had any connection in fact with his own failure to seek review of the denial of his claim
E. holding a party has no standing to appeal unless he or she is an aggrieved party an individual who is not a parent in the eyes of the law has no legal interest in the child and therefore has no standing to appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.