With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". court need not “grant review of all claims that raise a question about the proper interpretation of the Settlement Agreement.” Id, at 316. The district court does not abuse its discretion when it declines to review a decision that presents “no pressing question of how the Settlement Agreement should be interpreted or implemented, but simply raise[s] the correctness of a discretionary administrative decision in the facts of a single claimant’s case.” Claimant ID 100212278, 848 F.3d at 410 (quoting In re Deepwater Horizon, 641 Fed.Appx. at 410). On the other hand, denying review of a significant and recurring issue that has split numer ous Appeal Panels might be an abuse of discretion. See id.; cf. In re Deepwater Horizon, 632 Fed.Appx. 199, 203-04 & n.3 (5th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). III. We have no trouble concluding that LTCF

A: holding that district court abused discretion by denying review where over thirty appeal panels had heard appeals on the issue and issued conflicting decisions
B: holding that where the issue of sanctions was not before the court of appeals when the appeal was filed the district court retained jurisdiction
C: holding court of appeals lacks jurisdiction over the governments prosecutorial discretion decisions
D: holding that district court had not abused its discretion in denying plaintiffs motion to amend complaint
A.