With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 685 (9th Cir.2006). Removal jurisdiction may be based on diversity of citizenship or on the existence of a federal question. 28 U.S.C. § 1441. This case arises from the alleged wrongful foreclosure of Plaintiffs home. Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., re moved the action on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. For complete diversity to be present, all plaintiffs must have citizenship different from all defendants. See Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 68 n. 3, 117 S.Ct. 467, 136 L.Ed.2d 437 (1996). It is undisputed that Plaintiff is a citizen of California. It is also undisputed that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has its main office in South Dakota, and therefore is a citizen of that state. See Wachovia Bank v. Schmidt, 546 U.S. 303, 307, 126 S.Ct. 941, 163 L.Ed.2d 797 (2006) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff does not contest that Wells Fargo

A: recognizing that a prosecutors office is an entity and that information in the possession of one attorney in the office must be attributed to the office as a whole
B: holding successor national bank liable for punitive damages judgment against bank that merged into successor national bank
C: holding that a national bank is a citizen of the state in which its main office as set forth in its articles of association is located
D: holding that for diversity purposes a national bank is  a citizen of  the state of its principal place of business and the state listed in its organizational certificate
C.