With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". plaintiffs claim for benefits in this case for the period between April 1998 and May 2001 is barred by the principles of res judicata. As a result, plaintiffs monetary claim as of the date the complaint was filed is far below the statutory jurisdictional threshold of $75,000 for diversity cases. Accordingly, defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint for Jack of subject matter jurisdiction is granted. Since the dis Cross, No. 93 Civ. 1334, 1996 WL 18901, *8 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 17, 1996) (refusing to convert 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss on res judicata grounds into summary judgment motion despite consideration of records in prior judicial proceedings), aff'd 113 F.3d 1229, 1997 WL 279912 (2d Cir.1997) (unpublished decision); Kramer v. Time Warner Inc., 937 F.2d 767, 774 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Second, under Rule 12(b)(1), under which this

A: holding that another courts decision is a proper subject of judicial notice
B: recognizing that courts routinely take judicial notice of documents filed in other courts
C: holding that courts may take judicial notice of sec filings that are matters of public record
D: recognizing that a court may take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of public record
B.