With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of plaintiffs arguments are unpersuasive. In Cruden, the Second Circuit stated that a shareholder is not required to ask the trustee to sue itself. 957 F.2d at-968. Plaintiff states that the same absurdity is present here because any “action taken by Wells Fargo against LNR would necessarily require that Wells Fargo confirm its own liability.” (PL’s Opp’n at 6.) That is simply not the case. The misconduct that plaintiff alleges LNR committed in Count XV does not implicate Wells Fargo in any wrongdoing. Furthermore, courts have explicitly held that it is not akin to asking the trustee to bring an action against itself when the request is to sue a servicer or another manager of the trust, even if it may implicate some misconduct by the trustee. See Peak Partners, 191 Fed.Appx. at 126-27 (<HOLDING>); Ellington, 837 F.Supp.2d at 186-87 (holding

A: holding that a damages suit against a state officer in his official capacity was barred because it was functionally a suit against the state
B: holding that failure to respond in accord with  2605e2a b or c is a single respa violation because the statute provides a servicer with disjunctive response options not that a servicer has unfettered discretion in how to respond
C: holding that noaction clause barred suit against servicer for negligence
D: holding that a suit against a state official in his or her official capacity is not a suit against the official but rather is a suit against the officials office
C.