With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Rule 2-101(b), which elaborates when a federal filing may be deemed to be timely filed in our courts. They also maintain that their filing for a writ of mandamus excuses any delay in their judicial challenge because the limitations period set forth in Elec. Law § 12-202(b) does not apply. As noted, Elec. Law § 12—202(b)(1) requires a challenge to be made “10 days after the act or omission or the date the act or omission became known to the petitioner!.]” Yet, “[b]ecause the action [before us is] an equitable one, however, laches, rather than direct application of the statutory time period, [is] the proper focus.” Fraternal Order of Police v. Montgomery County, 446 Md. 490, 509, 132 A.3d 311, 332 (2016) (discussing Ross, 387 Md. at 668-70, 876 A.2d at 704-05). See also Md. Rule 2-323 (<HOLDING>). Notwithstanding the equitable nature of

A: holding that where defense of laches was not pleaded denial of equitable relief on grounds of laches was error
B: recognizing laches as an affirmative defense
C: recognizing laches as an equitable defense to a motion to reopen
D: holding that fair use is an affirmative defense
B.