With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". be inappropriate in this case because all Defendants lack standing to enforce the arbitration agreement, given that none of the Defendants were parties to the contract. (Pl.’s Mem. in Opp’n at 10.) In certain circumstances, however, a nonparty to an arbitration agreement can enforce, or be bound by, an arbitration provision within a contract executed by other parties so long as it is the “appropriate case,” or certain exceptions apply. See Int’l Paper Co. v. Schwabedissen Maschinen & Anlagen GMBH, 206 F.3d 411, 416-17 (4th Cir.2000) (“Well-established common law principles dictate that in an appropriate case a non-signatory can enforce, or be bound by, an arbitration provision within a contract executed by other parties.”); Britton v. Co-op Banking Group, 4 F.3d 742, 744 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Thomson-CSF, S.A. v. Am. Arbitration Assoc.,

A: recognizing that generally a nonparty to an arbitration agreement does not have standing to invoke the agreement but considering whether the nonparty could force arbitration because it was a third party beneficiary of the contract a successor in interest to the contracting party or an agent of the contracting party
B: holding that an arbitration agreement enforceable against party who signed the agreement even where the other party did not sign it because generally it is enough that the party against whom the contract is sought to be enforced signs it
C: holding that a party seeking to compel arbitration must establish the existence of an arbitration agreement and show that the claims raised fall within the scope of that agreement
D: holding the party seeking to invalidate an arbitration agreement because of prohibitive arbitration fees bears the burden of proof and the possibility of such party incurring prohibitive costs is too speculative to invalidate an arbitration agreement where the record reveals only that the agreement is silent on the subject of arbitration costs
A.