Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of limitations under Lampf. “However, every circuit to have addressed the issue since Lampf has held that inquiry notice is the appropriate standard.” Id. at 703-04 (listing the various circuits that have ruled upon the issue). Plaintiffs’ assertion that the Berry court held that actual notice is the appropriate standard is patently contradicted by the opinion. Specifically, the Berry court ruled that “we need not decide whether actual discovery or inquiry notice applies, because under either standard the Forbes article did not trigger the statute of limitations.” Id. at 704. This Court joins the circuits that have ruled upon the issue and finds that inquiry notice is the appropriate standard. See Carley Capital Group v. Deloitte & Touche, L.L.P., 27 F.Supp.2d 1324, 1341 (N.D.Ga.1998) ; cf. White v. Mercury Marine, 129 F.3d 1428,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding inquiry notice to be appropriate standard under lampf
B. recognizing that in certain circumstances inquiry notice may be determined as a matter of law
C. holding that the relevant inquiry is not whether the court has discretion to facilitate notice but whether this is an appropriate case in which to exercise discretion
D. holding that dismissal without prejudice was appropriate where a plaintiff failed to name each of the persons alleged to have violated the appropriate standard of care
E. holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.