With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". must obtain a CON from SHPDA. § 22-21-265. SHPDA is the sole agency responsible for handling reviews of CON applications. See § 22-21-260(14) and § 22-21-264. Section 22-21-263(a), Ala.Code 1975, provides the scope of SHPDA’s review: “All new institutional health services which are subject to this article and which are proposed to be offered or developed within the state shall be subject to review under this article. No institutional health services which are subject to this article shall be permitted which are inconsistent with the [SHP].” Section 22-21-263(a) provides SHPDA with the authority to review all proposed new institutional health services subject to § 22-21-265. See Prime Lithotripter Operations, Inc. v. LithoMedTech of Alabama, LLC, 855 So.2d 1085, 1093 (Ala.Civ.App.2001) (<HOLDING>). For those institutional health services

A: holding that the federal district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review plaintiffs complaint to the extent they sought review  of the district of columbia court of appeals denial of their petitions
B: holding that shpda lacked authority to require a con review for a matter not subject to  2221263
C: holding court of common pleas lacked subject matter jurisdiction to grant injunction against agency with statewide authority
D: holding that a federal district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over a suit that effectively sought review of an indiana state courts decision
B.