With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Nearly every case cited by the parties agrees, as does this court, that some funds must be spent on response costs prior to a declaratory judgment action being considered ripe. The Ninth Circuit, for example, has indicated that both sections 113(g)(2) and 107(a) “envision that, before suing, CERCLA plaintiffs will spend some money responding to an environmental hazard.” In re Dant & Russell, 951 F.2d at 249. Then, and only then can CERCLA plaintiffs “go to court and obtain ... a declaration that the responsible party will have continuing liability for the cost of finishing the job.” Id. at 249-50. “By requiring a plaintiff to take some positive action before coming to court,” the Ninth Circuit explains, “CERCLA ensures that the dispute will be ripe for judicial review.” Id. at 250 (<HOLDING>). See also Trimble, supra, slip op. at 10

A: holding that cleanup costs incurred pursuant to a consent decree were not incurred voluntarily and must be sought through a  113f contribution action
B: holding that because plaintiffs failed to prove that their incurred fuel characterization and loading costs would not have been incurred in the nonbreach world plaintiffs were not entitled to recovery for these costs
C: holding that where the defendants  107 claim was based on remediation costs they incurred and may incur in the future as the result of a lawsuit instituted under  107a they did not demonstrate that they incurred necessary costs of response within the meaning of  107a
D: holding that bankruptcy court could not enter judgment for 7402564 under  107a for incurred costs when such costs had not been incurred
D.