With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". CURIAM. Plaintiffs Piggly Wiggly Clarksville, Inc. et al. bring this interlocutory appeal of the district court order denying class certification under Rule 23(b)(3). We affirm. “[T]he district court maintains great discretion in certifying 419 (5th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). We have held that a district court did not

A: holding that class certification is not appropriate because plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the calculation of individualized actual economic damages if any suffered by the class members can be performed in accordance with the predominance requirement of rule 23b3
B: holding compensatory and punitive damages constitute legal remedies
C: holding that certification under rule 23b3 was not appropriate because plaintiffs claims for compensatory and punitive damages must therefore focus almost entirely on facts and issues specific to individuals rather than the class as a whole
D: holding that conduct must be beyond the fraud which supported compensatory damages to award punitive damages
C.