With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Cir.) (“[T]he mechanics of the notice process are left to the discretion of the court subject only to the broad reasonableness standards imposed by due process.”), cert, denied, 423 U.S. 864, 96 S.Ct. 124, 46 L.Ed.2d 93 (1975). Rule 23(e) notice is designed to be only “a summary of the litigation and the settlement [and] it is crucial to apprise class members of the right and opportunity to inspect the complete settlement documents, papers, and pleadings filed in the litigation.” See 2 Newberg § 8.32, at 8-109; see also Grunin, 513 F.2d at 122 (“Class members are not expected to rely upon the notices as a complete source of settlement information”). The notice need not be unduly specific. See 2 Newberg § 11.53, at 11-130 (citing In re “Agent Orange” Prod. Liab. Litig., 818 F.2d at 170 (<HOLDING>)). The notice need not include the entire

A: holding a complaint failed to satisfy rule 9b where the allegations were lacking in detail
B: holding that settlement notice that failed to detail a distribution plan was not inadequate
C: holding that our liberal rules of notice pleading do not require that specific evidentiary detail be alleged in the complaint
D: holding that inadequate notice did not trigger plans time bar for administrative review
B.