With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". United States Code that would categorically preclude a debtor from seeking a determination of dischargeability in state court. As declared by the above-cited Penn court, “both the bankruptcy court and any appropriate nonbankruptcy forum have jurisdiction to determine the dischargeability of a student loan debt.” In re Penn, 262 B.R. at 791. See In re Arnold, 255 B.R. 845, 850 (Bankr.W.D.Tenn.2000) (stating “bankruptcy court and the state court have concurrent jurisdiction to address the dischargeability of student loan debts under section 523(a)(8)”); In re Perkins, 228 B.R. 431, 433 (Bankr.E.D.Mo.1998) (observing that both federal and state courts have concurrent jurisdiction to determine the dischargeability of a student loan debt); In re Snyder, 228 B.R. 712, 718 (Bankr.D.Neb.1998) (<HOLDING>). See also Fed. R. Bankr.P. 4007 (advisory

A: holding that a federal court litigant who is forced into state court under pullman may reserve a right to return to federal court in that the plaintiff can preserve the right to the federal forum for federal claims by informing the state court of his or her intention to return following litigation of the state claims in the state court
B: recognizing that a citizen can sue the state in state court to attempt to obtain a discharge of a student loan and allowing the debtor to refile in state court
C: recognizing that even entry into contract with citizen of state does not necessarily subject party to jurisdiction in state
D: holding that a federal court in absence of a state supreme court pronouncement on a subject of state substantive law must determine as best it can what the highest court of the state would decide
B.