With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". forth in the DPPA “are not affirmative defenses for which a defendant carries the burden of proof; rather a plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the obtainment, disclosure, or use of personal information from [his] motor vehicle records was not for a purpose enumerated in [the statute].” Wootten, 2015 WL 1345276, at *15 n. 11, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35949, at *46 n. 11. Upon review of the amended complaint, the court agrees with the defendants that Stultz has not sufficiently alleged that his DMV information was impermissibly disclosed to the Capitol Police. See 18 U.S.C. § 2721(b) (permitting “use by any government agency, including any court or law enforcement agency, in carrying out its functions”); see also Wootten, 2015 WL 1345276, at *15, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35949, at *46 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the defendants’ motion to

A: holding that the disclosure is a public disclosure within the meaning of the fca if the the prior public disclosure  contained enough information to enable the government to pursue an investigation against the defendant
B: holding that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a violation of the fcra based on extraneous information where it was alleged that the document included broad language regarding disclosure of the information the accuracy of the information the consequences of providing a false statement and the effect of a photocopy
C: holding that the disclosure of the plaintiffs dmv information to the capitol police as described in the complaint was a permissible use under the dppa
D: holding that plaintiffs had standing to challenge a ten commandments display at the state capitol as plaintiffs frequently travel to the state capitol to engage in political advocacy for a variety of organizations and that they will endure direct and unwelcome contact with the ten commandments monument
C.