With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". below, the Court concludes that the breach of contract claim is not preempted, because it is a Bank, No. 08-CV-0069 (FCD), 2008 WL 2873406, at *9 (E.D.Cal. July 16, 2008) (“Defendants’ lending practices will not be affected whatsoever by [a breach of contract claim]. Instead, it is defendants’ practices of performing contractual obligations with good faith and fair dealing that might be affected”; breach of contract claim not preempted); Reyes v. Downey Savings and Loan Ass’n, FA., 541 F.Supp.2d 1108, 1114 (C.D.Cal.2008) (“[A] law against breach of contract will not be preempted just because the contract relates to loan activity.”); Binetti, 446 F.Supp.2d at 218-19 (noting that court had previously denied motion to dismiss contract claim as preempted under HOLA); Cassese MTD at 34-35 (<HOLDING>). Defendants correctly point out that some

A: holding breach of contract claim not preempted as a straightforward breach of contract action as it alleged violation of specific covenant
B: holding breach of contract claim not preempted under hola
C: recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract
D: holding that trial court erred by dismissing breach of contract claim because appellee made promises to perform specific acts in contract the breach of which would give rise to a breach of contract action
B.