With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to vacate did not delay rendition of the trial court’s earlier order ratifying the hearing officer's recommended order. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h) (2007) (providing that a motion “to vacate an order based on the recommendations of a hearing officer in accordance with Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.491” delays rendition of any final order). 3 .A litigant cannot expand the time for seeking review of a non-final order (e.g., an order on a discovery motion, which is one way to characterize what the petitioner seeks review of here) by filing a petition for writ of certio-rari addressed to an order on a motion for rehearing of an earlier non-final order that the petitioner failed to challenge in a timely manner. See, e.g., Blades v. Henry, 720 So.2d 323, 324 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>); Bensonhurst Drywall, Inc. v. Ledesma, 583

A: holding an order denying a motion for summary judgment is interlocutory and not appealable
B: holding that an order denying a motion to vacate a  1782 order and denying a motion to quash the subpoena was immediately appealable
C: holding that the filing of a motion for reconsideration does not toll the period for seeking judicial review of the underlying order
D: holding petitioner cannot circumvent time requirements for seeking certiorari review of an order denying a motion for a protective order by filing a successive motion seeking the same relief and seeking certiorari review that is timely only with respect to the order denying the second motion
D.