With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". she worked as a registered nurse and not as a floor nurse. Ms. Harris-Offutt’s affidavit states, however: There is no specialty in nursing known as “floor nursing.” Floor nurses in hospitals are usually registered nurses. Registered nurses are not limited to the hospital setting, but work in many different settings including nursing homes, the private offices of physicians and the private offices of registered nurses[.] Defendants offered no expert testimony to the contrary. Defendants’ remaining arguments regarding the differences between Ms. Harris-Offutt’s work experiences and the work experience of the hospital nursing staff go to the weight, but not the admissibility, of Ms. Harris-Offutt’s evidence. Howerton v. Arai Helmet, Ltd., 358 N.C. 440, 461, 597 S.E.2d 674, 688 (2004) (<HOLDING>). Thus, for purposes of summary judgment,

A: holding that the admissibility of expert testimony was governed by state law
B: holding that in face of expert testimony that database was valid questions concerning size of database and statistical conclusions drawn from it went to weight not admissibility of evidence
C: holding that once an expert has passed rule 702s threshold of admissibility lingering questions or controversy concerning the quality of the experts conclusions go to the weight of the testimony rather than its admissibility
D: holding that allegations of tampering went to the weight of the evidence rather than to its admissibility
C.