With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". decided the appropriate treatment of a motion to dismiss based on a forum-selection clause. See, e.g., In re Millennium Studios, Inc., 286 B.R. 300, 306 (D.Md.2002) (“There is currently no procedural mechanism specifically tailored to handle a motion to dismiss based on a forum-selection clause. The Fourth Circuit has not decided the issue of what approach to take and which subsection of Rule 12(b) is most appropriate for the situation.”). Other circuits have characterized such motions as motions under Fed.R.CivJP. 12(b)(1), (3), or (6). See, e.g., Silva v. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 239 F.3d 385 (1st Cir.2001) (treating motion to dismiss based on forum-selection clause as a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss); Lipcon v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, 148 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); AVC Nederland B.V. v. Atrium Inv. P’ship 740

A: recognizing circuit agreement that a motion to dismiss based on an arbitration clause is proper under rule 12b3
B: holding that a motion to dismiss based on a forumselection clause should be treated as a rule 12b3 motion to dismiss for improper venue
C: holding that motions to dismiss based on forumselection clause should be analyzed under rule 12b3
D: holding prejudgment denial of motion to dismiss on basis of forumselection clause not to be immediately appealable under  1291
C.