With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". CURIAM: Appealing the judgment in a criminal case following a remand for resentencing, Billy Wallace raises arguments that are foreclosed by the law of the case doctrine. See United States v. Matthews, 312 F.3d 652, 657 (5th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Even if we were to consider his arguments on-

A: holding that under the law of the case doctrine an issue of fact or law decided on appeal may not be reexamined by the appellate court on a subsequent appeal
B: holding that an issue not raised on direct appeal of sentence is barred by the law of the case from presentation in a subsequent appeal
C: holding that a judgment on appeal constitutes the law of the case as to particular issues decided and is applicable throughout subsequent stages of the case
D: holding that law of the case prevented the new jersey district court from redetermining jurisdictional issue previously decided by the district of columbia district court and noting that the principles of comity among courts of the same level of the federal system provide further reason why  an issue already decided by a court of equal authority should not be reexamined
A.