With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". United States Trustee (the “UST”) moved to vacate the Order granting interim fees to Mr. Desselle, and advised the Court that neither the application nor notice of the application had been served on the UST or, apparently, on anyone else. Thereafter, on June 13, 1995, the Court vacated its May 17,1995, Order granting interim compensation. The UST filed an objection to allowance of the fees, and a hearing was held on such objection on June 26, 1995. At said hearing, the Court found that Mr. Desselle had not provided specific information in support of his fee application so that the Court could determine what services were performed and what benefit accrued to the estate as a consequence of such services. Therefore, the application was denied without prej 718, 730 (Bankr.E.D.N.Y.1995) (<HOLDING>); In re Dawson, 180 B.R. 478, 480

A: holding that if the documentation of services is too vague or nonspecific the court may not award compensation
B: holding that absent any actual evidence of injury the plaintiffs allegations were too vague to establish the jurisdictional floor for damages
C: holding that in deciding whether the jurys award is inadequate the test is whether reasonable people could not conclude that the  award was reasonable compensation
D: holding sanctions order was too general to support award
A.