Given the task definition and input, reply with output. In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.

so as to give full meaning and effect to all of its provisions"(alterations, internal quotation marks and citation omitted) (emphasis added)). A party who has agreed to a particular term in a valid contract cannot later renege on that term or unilaterally declare it to no longer apply simply because the contract could have been formed without it. Contracting parties are bound to perform on the terms that they did agree to, not what they might have agreed to under different circumstances. Reyes counters that because the TCPA is a remedial statute enacted to protect consumers from unwanted telephone calls, any ambiguities in its text must be construed to further that purpose. See Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Buell, 480 U.S. 557, 562, 107 S.Ct. 1410, 94 L.Ed.2d 563 (1987) (<HOLDING>); E.E.O.C. v. Staten Island Sav. Bank, 207 F.3d
Holding statements: (A) holding that federal courts should apply state substantive law (B) holding that when interpreting broad remedial statutes courts should apply a standard of liberal construction in order to accomplish congresss objects citation omitted (C) holding on to objects in the room (D) holding that statutes are to be interpreted in accordance with the legislative intent and in a manner that will not render the statutes application absurd unreasonable or unjust internal quotation marks and citation omitted (E) holding federal courts should apply the aedpas deferential standard of review even when the petitioners claims have been summarily denied by the state courts
holding that federal courts should apply state substantive law