With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Cedarstone entered a fee petition, Music City and Armagh timely appealed. II. At oral argument, Music City and Armagh abandoned them argument as to the propriety of the district court’s order remanding this case to state court. This leaves only the award of costs and attorney fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) to Cedarstone as an issue on appeal. Here, Music City and Armagh appealed the court’s decision to award attorney fees and costs before the court had monetized the attorney fees and costs and entered final judgment. Had they waited to appeal the actual award, we would have had jurisdiction over their appeal. Warthman v. Genoa Township Bd. of Trustees, 549 F.3d 1055, 1059-60 (6th Cir.2008) (citing Stallworth v. Greater Cleveland Reg’l Transit Auth., 105 F.3d 252, 255 (6th Cir.1997)) (<HOLDING>). However, as the order awarding attorney fees

A: holding that although we typically review award or denial of attorneys fees and costs for an abuse of discretion where district court denies attorneys fees and costs based upon legal determination that a party is not a prevailing party we review the determination de novo
B: holding because an award of attorney fees is discretionary court may consider attorney fees in relation to the underlying equities in the case
C: holding a summary judgment to be final although motion to assess attorney fees remained pending because award of attorney fees is collateral to judgment
D: holding that we have jurisdiction to review the award or denial of attorney fees under  1447c
D.