With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to stay. This Court reviews the decision of the Bankruptcy Court to decline to award the requested sanctions under an abuse of discretion standard. Jones v. Illinois Central Ry. Co., 617 F.3d 843, 850 (6th Cir.2010) (reiterating that the Sixth Circuit reviews the decision of the District Court to award sanctions under Rule 11 under an abuse of discretion standard). The Docket Sheet of the Adversary Proceedings identifies Judge Clark’s decision of February 13, 2003, as Adv. Doc. #287. That document is not, however, part of the record on appeal in this matter. This Court is unable to review this assignment of error since Wenrick, the Appellant, neglected to include Judge Clark’s decision in the record on appeal. Hicks v. Floyd County Bd. of Ed., 99 Fed.Appx. 603, 605-06 (6th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). See also United States v. Johnson, 584 F.2d

A: holding that since district court of appeal properly found that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on a 3850 motion during the pendency of a direct appeal the district court of appeal should have vacated the order rather than affirming on the merits
B: holding that where record did not substantiate assertion that defendant was arraigned in february 1981 issues premised on the alleged arraignment were not properly before appellate court on defendants direct appeal of his criminal conviction since that court was bound by the certified record on appeal
C: holding that evidence not submitted to the district court cannot be part of the record on appeal
D: holding that it could not review the district courts rulings on the admissibility of exhibits since they were not included in the record on appeal
D.