With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". held that “a Rule 19 objection can even be noticed on appeal by a reviewing court sua sponte.” Pickle v. Int’l Oilfield Divers, Inc., 791 F.2d 1237, 1242 (5th Cir.1986) (citing Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson, 390 U.S. 102, 88 S.Ct. 733, 19 L.Ed.2d 936 (1968)); Kimball v. Florida Bar, 537 F.2d 1305, 1307 (5th Cir.1976); see 7 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1609 (3d ed. 2001); see also GTE Sylvania v. Consumer Product Safety, 598 F.2d 790, 798-99 (3d Cir.1979) (recognizing the power of the court to raise the issue sua sponte but declining to do so where “[the parties] could have intervened in the ... litigation without significant burden.”) (emphasis added). But see Hoots v. Pennsylvania, 495 F.2d 1095, 1096 n. 3 (3d Cir.1974) (<HOLDING>). Further, “a court of appeals should, on its

A: holding that a ruling of the trial court to which no error has been assigned becomes the law of the case and is not subject to review by the court of appeals
B: holding that issues not raised in the trial court may not be raised later on appeal
C: holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
D: holding that a court of appeals may only do so when an appeal has been raised by an existing party to the case
D.