With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the absence of a direct conflict, a state law violates the supremacy clause when it ‘stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.’ ” Id. at 186-87 (quoting Mass. Med. Soc’y v. Dukakis, 815 F.2d 790, 791 (1st Cir.1987) (citations omitted)). 1. Presumption Against Preemption Defendants vigorously contend that there should be no presumption against preemption in this context, for “[pjolicing fraud against federal agencies is hardly ‘a field which the States have traditionally occupied,’ ... such as to warrant a presumption against finding federal preemption of a state-law cause of action.” Buckman, 531 U.S. at 347, 121 S.Ct. 1012 (quoting Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218, 230, 67 S.Ct. 1146, 91 L.Ed. 1447 (1947)) (<HOLDING>). The Courts have long presumed that the

A: holding that state claims for fraudulent submissions to the fda were preempted
B: holding the state law claims were not preempted
C: holding that plaintiffs state claims were not preempted because defendant failed to show that these claims rested on standards other than those permitted by the fda
D: holding fraudulent representations to the fda could not sustain statelaw claims
A.