With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". pretenses. Zamora, 811 F.2d at 1370; Zeller v. Samia, 758 F.Supp. 775, 781 (D.Mass.1991); see also Comeaux, 915 F.2d at 1273; Hansen, 582 F.2d at 1219— 20. It is uncontested that defendant requested the credit report in connection with his criminal investigation of Allen. Neither a criminal investigation nor a state grand jury subpoena constitute a permissible purpose to furnish a consumer report under § 1681b. However, it is also uncontested that defendant revealed to Halsey the purpose for which he sought the report. Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant obtained the report through the use of false pretenses. See Houghton v. New Jersey Manuf. Ins. Co., 615 F.Supp. 299, 306 (D.C.Pa.1985), rev’d. on other grds., 795 F.2d 1144 (3rd Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Finally, the court notes that Allen has

A: holding that the offense requires that the return be false as to a material matter
B: holding as a matter of law that user who disclosed impermissible purpose was not guilty of obtaining information through false pretenses
C: holding that unless an affirmative defense is established as matter of law defendant bears burden of obtaining jury findings necessary to support defense
D: holding that it may be decided as a matter of law
B.