With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in Kellogg. DCC did not need the participation of Coachman or Olympic Mills to collect the money Rivera had retained in breach of the Subordination Agreement. When Coachman and Olympic Mills eventually sought intervention as of right, the interests they advanced flowed directly from their status as debtors-in-possession. Critically, these interests did not arise until Coachman and Olympic Mills filed for bankruptcy on November 26, 2001, almost a month after DCC filed suit against Rivera. See Free-port-McMoRan, Inc., 498 U.S. at 428, 111 S.Ct. 858 (a nondiverse dispensable party that had no interest in the outcome of the litigation until sometime after suit was commenced did not defeat diversity jurisdiction); Aurora Loan Servs., Inc. v. Craddieth, 442 F.3d 1018, 1025 (7th Cir. 2006) (<HOLDING>); Salt Lake Tribune Publ’g Co., LLC v. AT & T

A: holding that a failure to comply with the foreclosure statutes invalidates a foreclosure sale
B: holding that diversity jurisdiction was not destroyed by the intervention of a nondiverse party whose claims arose in the course of a foreclosure proceeding after it obtained the certificate of sale
C: holding that a nonstatutory postponement  does not constitute an irregularity in the foreclosure proceeding itself that could justify setting aside a foreclosure sale
D: holding that res judicata does not bar those claims that arose after the original pleading is filed in the earlier proceeding
B.