With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". medication, King filed a timely appeal. In the main, this appeal presents the question of whether the district court erred in denying Plaintiff-Appellant’s requested Fourth Amendment jury instructions with regard to Kramer. We address that portion of the appeal first. II In granting Kramer’s motion in li-mine to preclude Plaintiff-Appellant from arguing the applicability of the Fourth Amendment, the district court stated that Plaintiff-Appellant had waived her Fourth Amendment claim. Slip Op. at 6 (W.D.Wis. Jan. 9, 2013), ECF No. 643 (“[Pjlaintiff waived any right to a Fourth Amendment claim premised on an objectively unreasonable standard by failing to timely pursue such a claim. The court will not allow such a significant shift in plaintiffs theory of recovery on t th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted). Likewise, Williams

A: holding that arguments not raised before the trial court are waived
B: holding that a claim is not properly before the appellate court because it is axiomatic that arguments not raised below are waived on appeal
C: holding that arguments not raised below are waived for appeal
D: holding arguments not raised on appeal waived
B.