With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Ray, 2000 UT App 55 at 113 n. 2, 998 P.2d 274, is simply the name and date of birth of the individual on whom the warrants check is to be run. After that information has been mentally noted, or even read to dispatch in the case of a long name with unusual spelling, the identification can be "promptly return[ed]," id., ie., returned within 4 or 5 seconds, while the officer awaits the result of the warrants check on his own time, as it were. The immediate return of the identification card to the individual, even as the officer continues to await word from dispatch, unambiguously signals the individual that he is free to go and is under no obligation to wait with the officer to learn the result of the warrants check. CJ. United States v. Soto-Lopez, 995 F.2d 694, 698 (7th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). 123 By holding Adams's identification

A: holding no seizure occurred when law enforcement officers returned the plane ticket and identification immediately after looking at them
B: holding that the defendant was not seized where one officer read information from the defendants airline ticket and another officer took notes observing that the officers immediately returned the ticket after examination and did not retain the ticket for an unusual length of time
C: holding fourth amendment not implicated when police officers asked defendant to see his airline ticket asked for identification and requested consent to search him
D: holding law enforcement request for identification not tantamount to seizure finding no constitutional violation when law enforcement conduct consisted simply of questioning employees and arresting those they had probable cause to believe were unlawfully present
A.