With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". § 1252(b)(4)(B); Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510, 513 (2d Cir.2009). I. Violation of China’s Family Planning Policy As an initial matter, the BIA’s application of Shi Liang Lin v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 494 F.3d 296 (2d Cir.2007) (en banc), and Matter of J-S-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 520 (A.G.2008), was not error because the BIA was bound to apply the law in effect at the time it entered its decision. See NLRB v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Buffalo, Inc., 55 F.3d 74, 78 (2d Cir.1995) (“Appellate courts ordinarily apply the law in effect at the time of the appellate decision.”). Moreover, Ye had the opportunity to present his claim after the issuance of Shi Liang Lin because his merits hearing did not occur until the following year. See Burger v. Gonzales, 498 F.3d 131, 134 (2d Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). The BIA reasonably concluded that Ye failed

A: holding that there is no due process violation where the ijs finding was not arbitrary and the alien was not denied a full and fair opportunity to present his claims
B: holding that an alien is entitled to the fifth amendment guarantee of due process which is satisfied by a full and fair hearing
C: holding that to establish a violation of due process an alien must show that she was denied a full and fair opportunity to present her claims internal quotation marks omitted
D: holding that a petitioner must show prejudice in order to prevail on a claim that he or she was denied a full and fair hearing in violation of due process
C.