Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Government failed to prove that he possessed the SSN “in relation to” his false representation offense, he has waived any such argument on appeal by failing to raise it in his Fed.R.Crim.P. 29 motion before the district court. United States v. Chong Lam, 677 F.3d 190, 200 (4th Cir. 2012). Castellanos-Loya next urges that the district court abused its discretion in declining to prohibit testimony about the date of birth associated with the SSN, due to the Government’s late disclosure of the pertinent information. We have reviewed the record and conclude that, regardless of whether the district court properly considered the factors enumerated in United States v. Hastings, 126 F.3d 310, 317 (4th Cir.1997), any error was harmless. United States v. Johnson, 617 F.3d 286, 292 (4th Cir.2010) . Finally, Castellanos-Loya attacks his
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that evidentiary rulings are subject to harmless error renew
B. holding that confrontation clause violations are subject to harmless error review
C. holding blakely errors are subject to harmless error analysis
D. holding that confrontation clause issues are subject to harmless error analysis
E. holding trial errors are subject to a harmless error analysis
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.