With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". requirements for filing a charge under § 626(d) are not met. [Id. (citation omitted).] Since the plaintiffs have "failed to file a charge with the EEOC within 300 days of [their] termination, as required by § 626(d)(2) * * their claim is "barred unless a reason for equitable modification of the limitations period appears.” Id.; see also Heiar v. Crawford County, 746 F.2d 1190, 1194-96 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 3500, 87 L.Ed.2d 631 (1985). 2 To achieve that national uniformity, it has been held that ERISA preempts substantive state-law claims based on a former employer’s negligent handling of a benefit claim. Russell v. Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co., 722 F.2d 482, 487-88 (9th Cir.1983), rev’d on other grounds, 473 U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 3085, 87 L.Ed.2d 96 (1985) (<HOLDING>). "ERISA does not supersede state regulation in

A: holding that our courts have never found that violation of the nceepa creates a private right of action
B: recognizing private right of action
C: holding that no private right of action exists
D: holding that erisa creates no private right of action
D.