With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". with an evidentiary basis for an exception. Accordingly, the Court finds that its grant of limited jurisdictional discovery does not infringe on sovereign immunity. IV. Conclusion As a final note, the Court would be remiss not to point out the Country of Curacao and the Kingdom of the Netherlands’ failure to comply with the procedures of the Court. The Country of Curacao and the Kingdom of the Netherlands waited to raise sovereign immunity until almost four months after Plaintiffs filed the amended motion for limited jurisdictional discovery. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, along with many courts of appeals around the country, looks disfavorably on “Defendants who abuse the pretrial process through such stalling .... ” See Skrtich v. Thornton, 280 F.3d 1295, 1306 (11th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>); see also, e.g., Ungar, 402 F.3d at 293

A: holding defendants waived right to raise qualified immu nity at pretrial proceedings
B: holding party may raise jurisdictional issue at any stage of proceedings
C: holding that a defendant who fails to raise a specific issue as the basis for suppression in a motion to suppress to the district court has waived the right to raise that issue on appeal
D: holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity
A.