With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Gillis contends A&P’s manner of curing was unreasonably protracted, he failed to respond to David’s letters that spelled out exactly how A&P planned to cure. As a result, this Court is not left with a definite or firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. Consequently, the district court did not err. Because this Court finds neither clear error in the district court’s findings of fact nor abuse of discretion in the its exercise of jurisdiction, this Court affirms the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED. 2 . The Travelers standard is intended for pure declaratory judgment cases and therefore may not have been appropriate in the instant case, which included a counterclaim for monetary damages. See Diamond Offshore Co. v. A & B Builders, Inc., 302 F.3d 531, 539 (5th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Yet even if the Travelers standard was

A: holding that inclusion of timely and nonfrivolous monetary damages removed a suit from the realm of a declaratory judgment action for purposes of determining exercise of jurisdiction
B: holding that because suit requested damages for breach of contract colorado river applied even though district court characterized suit as declaratory judgment action
C: holding that the determination and assessment of damages are not the primary purpose of a declaratory action
D: holding that immunity from suit barred claim that although couched in terms of suit alleging potential statelaw violations sought monetary damages for breach of contract
A.