With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". The Opinion, filed on September 1, 2010 and reported at 620 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2010), is amended as follows: 1. At slip op. 13266, 620 F.3d at 1209, the citation <see also Defenders of Wildlife v. Flowers, 414 F.3d 1066, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005) > is replaced with <see also Tribal Village of Akutan v. Hodel, 869 F.2d 1185, 1193 (9th Cir.l988).> 2. At slip op. 13266, 620 F.3d at 1210, the citation <see Defenders of Wildlife, 414 F.3d at 1072.> is replaced with <see Cal. ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 575 F.3d 999, 1018-19 (9th Cir.2009). > 3. At slip op. 13267, 620 F.3d at 1210, the citation <see also Defenders of Wildlife, 414 F.3d at 1074 (<HOLDING>)> is deleted. An Amended Opinion is filed

A: holding that the corps arbitrarily refused to initiate section 7 consultation where fws demanded consultation
B: holding that section 311034 does not make section 890041 jurisdictional
C: holding that section 4a12 is a broadly applicable section of the guidelines
D: holding that to the extent that the securing of information is necessary to a prosecutors decision to initiate a criminal prosecution it is encompassed within the protected quasijudicial immunity afforded to the decision itself
A.