With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 844 F.2d 628, 634 (9th Cir.1988)); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir.1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim, particularly when, as here, a host of other issues are presented for review.”); Meehan v. County of L.A, 856 F.2d 102, 105 n. 1 (9th Cir.1988) (deeming an issue abandoned due to the party’s failure to brief it). We have confirmed that, in the immigration context, an alien does not preserve a claim where the alien references an issue in his opening brief — and even indicates that he will present argument on the subject — but does not discuss the claim in the argument section. See Maharaj v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 961, 967 (9th Cir.2006); Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). The majority asserts that “we need not decide

A: holding that the petitioners failure to address an issue in the argument portion of his opening brief waived the issue
B: holding that failure to raise an issue in an opening brief waives that issue
C: holding that the failure to raise an issue in the opening brief waives the issue
D: holding argument waived for failure to raise it in opening brief
A.