Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
altering, defacing, modifying and mutilating it, thus harming his honor and reputation as an artist. Continuing to take Pavia’s factual allegations to be true for the purposes of this motion, “The Ides of March” falls within the category of works protected under VARA. VARA deems a sculpture to be a “work of visual art” if it is “existing in a single copy ... or in multiple east, carved, or fabricated sculp tures of 200 or fewer that are consecutively numbered by the author and bear the signature or other identifying mark of the author.” VARA § 602, 17 U.S.C. § 101. Despite the fact that it consists of four separate elements, “The Ides of March” is alleged to be a single work of art whose elements “form an integrated whole.” Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, 861 F.Supp. 303, 314 (S.D.N.Y.1994)  As a single piece, “The Ides of March” thus
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the two elements of a copyright infringement claim are 1 the plaintiff owns a valid copyright right and 2 the defendants copied constituent elements of the work that are original
B. holding a number of sculptural elements including art work attached to the ceiling and the floor interactive art a vast mosaic covering the majority of the floor of the lobby and portions of the walls and several sculptural elements to be a single work of art whose elements are interrelated
C. holding elements of rescission are 1
D. holding that invalidity for anticipation requires that all of the elements and limitations of the challenged claim are found within a single prior art reference
E. holding that the elements of a hostile work environment claim are the same across discrimination contexts and applying those elements specifically to the age discrimination in employment act
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.