With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". preempted under § 502. As such, it is proper for this court to exercise removal jurisdiction because claims preempted under § 502 fall within the complete preemption exception to the well-pleaded complaint rule. D. ERISA-Speciftc Pleading Requirements Beca th Cir.2000) (finding exhaustion was required when it was clearly required under the plan at issue); Schleeper v. Purina Benefits Ass’n, 170 F.3d 1157, 1157 (8th Cir.1999) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and rejecting the plaintiffs argument that exhaustion would have been futile); Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Beckham, 138 F.3d 325, 332 & n. 4 (8th Cir.1998) (recognizing the futility exception to the exhaustion requirement under ERISA); Layes v. Mead Corp., 132 F.3d 1246, 1252 (8th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Policy considerations supporting the

A: holding that administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing a claim in court
B: holding that a claimants claim is barred when administrative remedies that are clearly required under an erisa plan are not exhausted
C: holding exhaustion of administrative remedies not required prior to bringing statutory claim under erisa
D: holding that the ftca bars claimants from bringing suit in federal court until they have exhausted their administrative remedies
B.