With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". on June 25,1996. Not all members of the proposed class who purchased SS & C stock within the 25-day period have standing to bring a claim against Hambreeht & Quist or Alex. Brown under § 12(a)(2), however. Section 12(a)(2) further requires that plaintiffs “purchase their shares directly from a seller who makes use of a false or misleading prospectus.” Id. at 67. The term “seller” encompasses not only anyone who stands in privity with a purchaser, but also anyone “who successfully solicits the purchase [of a security], motivated at least in part by a desire to serve his own financial interests or those of the securities owner.” Pinter v. Dahl, 486 U.S. 622, 646, 108 S.Ct. 2063, 100 L.Ed.2d 658 (1988); see Wilson v. Saintine Exploration & Drilling Corp., 872 F.2d 1124, 1126 (2d Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). In order to fall within this second category

A: holding pinter analysis to apply to claims arising under  12a2
B: holding that the court of federal claims lacked jurisdiction over claims arising from the violation of a criminal statute
C: recognizing that claims arising under the ihra are analyzed under the same standards as title vii claims
D: holding wyoming only had standing to pursue section 12a2 claims as to indx 2006ar11
A.