Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
claim under the ADA, we reject Russell’s disparate treatment argument vis-a-vis her sex discrimination claim under Title VII. As explained above, in accordance with facts not genuinely disputed, we cannot reasonably infer that the infractions committed by Drew and Evans were of comparable seriousness to Russell’s. C. Retaliation claim Finally, Russell argues that the District Court erred in holding that she failed to exhaust her administrative remedies with respect to her retaliation claim. She contends that her retaliation claim is reasonably related to, or grows out of, the substance of her allegations in the administrative charge and therefore was sufficiently exhausted. Brief for Appellant at 55-57 (citing, e.g., Stuart v. Gen. Motors Corp., 217 F.3d 621, 631 (8th Cir. 2000) ). In support of this argument, Russell
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that claimant exhausted administrative remedies only as to the complaints made in the original charge and factually related claims that reasonably could be expected to grow out of the administrative investigation of that charge
B. holding that regarded as claim is reasonably related to claim of discrimination on the basis of disability alleged in eeoc charge
C. recognizing that a claim is administratively exhausted if it is specifically stated in grows out of or is reasonably related to the substance of the allegations in an administrative charge or complaint
D. holding individual employee may assert unexhausted retaliation claim if the later claim is reasonably related to the allegations in the employees timely filed charge
E. holding sexual harassment claim was not like or related to retaliation allegations and therefore was outside the scope of the administrative charge
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.