With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". gave rise to a simple tort claim between strangers, not a dispute arising out of the commercial relationship. The accident did not involve the Red Lake Band itself, and although the individual injured was a member of the Red Lake Band, he was not a party to the commercial relationship. The Tribal Court asserts that additional discovery is necessary to determine the facts regarding whether Nord was driving in connection with a contract with the Red Lake Band or on a personal errand. We conclude that such facts would not be material in this situation because the dispute merely involves the tortious conduct of “a run-of-the-mill highway accident” between strangers, and no amount of discovery can alter the nature of that claim. See id. at 457, 117 S.Ct. 1404 (internal marks omitted) (<HOLDING>); see also Plains Commerce Bank, 491 F.3d at

A: holding that the first exception did not apply to a highway traffic accident dispute that was distinctly nontribal in nature internal marks omitted
B: holding that the agency did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant a continuance where the petitioner was only at the first step in a long and discretionary process and relief was speculative at best alterations and internal quotation marks omitted
C: recognizing that party is not permitted to use the accident of a remand to raise an issue that it could just as well have raised in the first appeal internal quotation marks and alterations omitted
D: holding that compliance with rule 3 is both a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite to appeal internal quotation marks omitted
A.