With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". caused by the continuing traffic in the victim’s images. The total amount of a victim’s losses caused by the continuing traffic in the victim’s image is determined by looking to costs incurred from the time of the offense conduct and excluding those costs incurred prior to that date. United States v. Rogers, 758 F.3d 37, 39 (1st Cir.2014). In order to effectively determine what general losses are attributable to the offense conduct of a particular defendant, courts should separate such losses from those caused by the initial abuser and those caused by other viewers of the images. . Id.; Reynolds, at *5 (stating that a defendant is not responsible for costs predating the offense conduct as he is only liable for harms arising out of the “continuing traffic” of the images); Miner, at *8 (<HOLDING>); United States v. Watkins, 2014 WL 3966381, at

A: holding that general losses must be sufficiently disaggregated from losses caused by the initial abuser when determining those losses caused by the continuing traffic of the images
B: holding that restitution is proper for victims losses that are directly caused by appellants conduct for which he was convicted
C: holding that restitution is proper under  2259 only to the extent the defendants offense proximately caused a victims losses
D: holding that on remand ferc had the authority to order  recoupment of losses caused by its errors
A.