With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of the company5’); Alfus v. Pyramid Technology Corp., 764 F.Supp. 598, 603 (N.D.Cal.1991) (finding that a company may be liable for not correcting analysts’ forecasts where it undertakes to provide information regarding and pass on the analysts’ forecasts, but finding no liability where a company officer merely examines and comments upon an analyst’s report); In re Aldus Sec. Litig., [1992-1993 Transfer Binder] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH ¶ 97,376 at 95,984-85) (W.D.Wash.1993) (finding plaintiffs’ claim sufficiently alleged that defendants placed their imprimatur on analysts’ reports, but employing a lower Rule 9(b) pleading requirement than is applied in this circuit); In re Cypress Semiconductor Sec. Litig., [1993 Transfer Binder] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 97,060 at 94,698 (N.D.Cal. 1992) (<HOLDING>). Appellants argue that we should adopt the

A: holding that such information is not material under securities law
B: holding that single paragraph asserting that plaintiffs based their information and belief on investigation of sec filings analysts reports press releases and discussions with consultants neither provided required facts underlying complaints allegations nor directed court to where facts could be found
C: holding that plaintiffs need only allege that defendants provided information to the securities analysts upon which the reports were based
D: holding no scienter had been alleged where the plaintiffs failed to allege that the defendants had access to information that specifically informed them of the alleged flaws in the preparation of pxres loss estimate reports
C.