With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". County policy. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). Brooks amended his claim to allege that the County’s conduct “was part of a general policy of neglect that [the County] has followed when dealing with federal detainees jailed in County facilities.” Again the district court dismissed the claim, this time with prejudice, on the ground that the complaint did not allege a deliberate County policy with sufficient particularity. We need not decide whether the district court erred in declining to permit a further amendment, because the district court’s ruling was correct even if the complaint had been amended as proposed. See United States v. Kaluna, 192 F.3d 1188, 1999 WL 770907, at *7 n. 2 (9th Cir. Sept. 30, 1999) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). That is so because the alleged actions of the

A: holding that judgment may be affirmed on any ground supported by the record
B: holding that a district courts ruling may be upheld on an alternative ground supported by the record
C: holding that we may affirm on an alternative basis supported by the record
D: holding that the record supported the district courts award of damages
B.