With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". who “were deterred from applying to or enrolling in Boston University or will be so deterred in the future.” Plaintiffs Proposed Order, at 2. It is here that this Court will invoke its discretion to limit the unnecessary. Even if deterred applicants to BU have standing to sue the university, their inclusion in the class does little either to further the plaintiffs’ goal of obtaining declaratory and injunctive relief or to resolve the problem of mootness. Nothing is gained by conferring membership on individuals with learning disabilities who have been deterred. In the exercise of its discretion, this Court restricts the certified class to students with learning disabilities who are currently enrolled at BU. See Andrews v. Bechtel Power Corp., 780 F.2d 124, 131 (1st Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1172, 106 S.Ct. 2896,

A: holding that the judges restriction of the class was not an abuse of discretion
B: holding it was not an abuse of discretion to exclude testimony
C: holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion
D: holding the immigration judges denial of a continuance request did not constitute an abuse of discretion
A.