Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the PSLRA’s more rigorous standard. Plaintiffs’ allegations regarding Daou’s “pipeline” expectations, however, fail to satisfy the PSLRA’s requirements. The complaint alleges that Daou misrepre-_ sented its “pipeline” expectations, stating that its position was “extremely strong” and “remained healthy and would fuel future earnings growth,” that “visibility of future earnings was outstanding,” and that the company’s “momentum was increasing.” Although these projections might have been overly optimistic when made, they do not rise to the level of a material misrepresentation actionable after enactment of the PSLRA: Congress enacted the PSLRA to put an end to the practice of pleading “fraud by hindsight.” See e.g., Medhekar v. United States Dist. Ct., 99 F.3d 325, 328 (9th Cir.1996) . Silicon Graphics, 183 F.3d at 988. Under the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it was an abuse of discretion for the district court at the summary judgment stage to consider information from an affidavit based on inadmissible hearsay rather than the affiants personal knowledge
B. holding the defendant responsible for the greater of the actual or intended loss
C. holding that scienter had not adequately been pled where the plaintiffs provided none of the required facts underlying the complaints allegations as to the information that was supposedly available to the individual defendants
D. holding that there is a duty to defend if any of the complaints allegations fall within the risk covered by the policy
E. holding that congress intended for complaints under the pslra to stand or fall based on the actual knowledge of the plaintiffs rather than information produced by the defendants after the action has been filed
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.