With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". as factual allegations. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (citing Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986)). A viable complaint must include “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its’face.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 554, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (rejecting the traditional 12(b)(6) standard set forth in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)), “Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Id at 555,127 S.Ct. 1955. See also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 554, 127 S.Ct. 1955, and providing further guidance on the standard set forth therein) (<HOLDING>). In deciding the defendants’ motion, the court

A: holding that while the complaint need not contain detailed factual allegations it must contain more than a formulaic recitation of the elements of a claim and must state a claim that is plausible on its face
B: holding that a complaint must contain only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face
C: holding that a plaintiffs complaint must contain sufficient factual matter accepted as true to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face   that is factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged
D: holding that a complaint must contain enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face
A.