With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Plaintiff may only seek damages that were incurred prior to that date. See Indiana Michigan, 422 F.3d at 1376-77. Plaintiffs April 20, 2011 Motion For Leave is a motion to supplement the September 4, 2009 Complaint under RCFC 15(d), rather than to amend under RCFC 15(a), because Plaintiff seeks damages that were incurred after the filing of this action. See System Fuels, 73 Fed.Cl. at 211 (“Plaintiffs’ requested amendment of the complaint is proper under [RCFC 15(a),] although the amendments are not the primary thrust of their motion for leave; su (Fed.Cir.2008) ("SMUD IV") (remanding with instructions to assess damages at the proper rate, and without applying certain offsets claimed by the Government); Sacramento Mun. Util. Dist. v. United States, 91 Fed.Cl. 9 (2009) ("SMUD V") (<HOLDING>). 2 . RCFC 15(d) provides, in relevant part: On

A: holding that smud is entitled to 53159863 in mitigation costs but staying entry of judgment pending the outcome of this proceeding
B: holding that imposition occurs at time of entry of judgment
C: holding that this court has power to direct the entry of summary judgment when it would be just under the circumstances
D: holding that smud was entitled to mitigation damages for costs incurred from may 15 1997 to december 31 2003
A.