With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Kellstrom, 50 F.3d 319, 336 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 173, 133 L.Ed.2d 113 (1995); Chambers v. Ingram, 858 F.2d 351, 360-61 (7th Cir.1988). Nevertheless, Plaintiffs cite no authority for the proposition that a court must award Rule 26(b)(4)(C) fees no matter how long after entry of final judgment a party requests such fees. In the present case, we do not believe the district court abused its discretion in ruling that Plaintiffs’ motion for fees was untimely given that it was filed four and one-half months after the court had entered a final judgment in the case and ordered each party to bear its own costs. Courts have granted motions for fees under Rule 26(b)(4)(C) that were filed even later than Plaintiffs’ motion in the instant case. See, Kellstrom, 50 F.3d at 336 (<HOLDING>). However, special circumstances usually exist

A: holding that request for rule 26 costs filed nine months after original application for taxation of costs not untimely
B: holding that costs are not fixed until judgment is entered and interest can only run on costs when due
C: holding that severance motion to permit exculpatory testimony of codefendant filed nine days after start of trial was untimely
D: holding that investigatory costs are considered costs of response under cercla
A.