With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". judges who agree with Chief Judge Jones that Till does not require a court to use the prime rate as the starting point. See, e.g., In re Village at Camp Bowie 1, L.P., 454 B.R. 702, 713 (Bankr. N.D. Tex, 2011); In re Walkabout Creek Ltd. Dividend Hous. Ass'n Ltd. P’ship, 460 B.R. 567, 574-79 (Bankr. D.D.C. 2011); In re MPM Silicones, LLC, 531 B.R. 321, 334 (S.D.N.Y. 2015). However, these cited cases, and other cases found by this Court, are all Chapter 11 cases, whereas Till dealt with a Chapter 13 case. As far as the undersigned judge can discern, Chief Judge Jones is the only bankruptcy judge who has issued an opinion holding that, in a this rule. See id. at 330-31, 113 S.Ct. 2106 (explaining the exception); see also In re Cano, 410 B.R. 506, 529-30 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2009) (<HOLDING>). Specifically, this provision states that:

A: holding that a mortgage or modification of a mortgage is not a good or a service under the dtpa
B: recognizing exception
C: holding that section 1322b5 provides an explicit exception to  1322b2s prohibition of mortgage modifications
D: holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage
C.