With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". does not allege that his injuries were the result of a discriminatory policy, see id. 70 . O'Rourke, 235 F.3d at 731 ("This court has identified several criteria in determining the sufficiency of a serial continuing violation claim, which we summarize here: (1) is the subject matter of the discriminatory acts sufficiently similar that there is a substantial relationship between the otherwise untimely acts and the timely acts? (2) are the acts isolated and discrete or do they occur with frequency or repetitively or continuously? (3) are the acts of sufficient permanence that they should trigger an awareness of the need to assert one's rights?”) (internal quotation marks omitted). See also Sabree v. United Broth. of Carpenters and Joiners Local No. 33, 921 F.2d 396, 402 (1st Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). 71 . See National R.R. Passenger Corp. v.

A: recognizing temporal proximity as important factor
B: recognizing that the supreme court has referred to the policy of avoiding piecemeal litigation as by far the most important colorado river factor
C: recognizing that the third factor permanence is the most important
D: holding that the most important factor in the preservation hierarchy is whether the relevant issue was raised in the trial court and the least important factor is whether the appellant alerted the trial court to the specific argument raised on appeal
C.