With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Cir.2004). This means that “a plaintiff who seeks relief for misappropriation of trade secrets must identify the trade secrets and carry the burden of showing that they exist.” Rent Info. Tech., Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A, Inc., 268 Fed.Appx. 555, 557 (9th Cir.2008) (applying Georgia law). A plaintiff also must allege and show that the claimed information “[djerives economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use” and “[i]s the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.” O.C.G.A. § 10-1-761(4). The claim fails if any of the elements are not shown. See Capital Asset Research, 160 F.3d at 686 (<HOLDING>). A defendant “misappropriates” a trade secret

A: holding that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact that its customer list was a trade secret because the plaintiff presented evidence that the list took ten years and great expense to the company to develop
B: holding that the burden of establishing the true existence of a trade secret and its value to the owner remains on the claimant who must submit evidence relating to the six factors that texas law considers for trade secret status
C: holding that the plaintiff failed to carry its burden of proving that its customer list was a trade secret in part because the sole evidence in regard to the customerlist concerned the expenditures in an unidentified sum
D: holding that it was impossible for the court to say that the information met the definition of a trade secret because the plaintiff failed to present evidence that the information derived economic value from an element of secrecy that is known only to plaintiff and its employees
D.