With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". relied on state agency’s repeated representations that it had filed an EEOC complaint); Stutz v. Depository Trust Co., 497 F.Supp. 654 (S.D.N.Y.1980) (tolling limitations period where it appeared credible that state agency erroneously informed plaintiff it was unnecessary to check a required box on her retaliation claim when she had already checked that box on her initial complaint); Abbott v. Moore Business Forms, Inc., 439 F.Supp. 643, 649 (D.N.H.1977) (finding that “the Department of Labor’s communication with plaintiff was such as might mislead a layperson into the course of action taken by plaintiff with the consequent failure to file [a] notice within the statutory period”); Ramos v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, No. 76 Civ. 312, 1976 WL 581 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 1976) (<HOLDING>). If the pro se plaintiff believes that he can

A: holding that tolling the statute of limitations was appropriate when the eeoc acknowledged that it had advocated the mistaken interpretation relied upon by the plaintiff
B: holding that the timely filing of a discrimination charge with the eeoc is not a jurisdictional prerequisite but a requirement that like a statute of limitations is subject to waiver estoppel and equitable tolling
C: holding that equitable tolling was appropriate where a pro se plaintiff had relied on the representations of the court clerk
D: holding that when the department of insurance acknowledged that it had received an accident report of a claim within the statute of limitations  it was thereafter estopped after the expiration of the statute of limitations to deny receipt of the claim
A.