Instructions: 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.
Input: claim". Williams (Willie), 4 Vet.App. at 273-74. 3. Litigation Stage. Having concluded that the Secretary was not substantially justified in his position at the administrative stage, the Court need not address whether the government's litigation position before this Court was substantially justified. See Looker and ZP, both supra. III. Conclusion Accordingly, having concluded that the Court's remand to the Board was based in part on a determination that the Board had committed an error of adjudication that was not substantially justified and that would itself constitute sufficient grounds for a remand, the Court grants the October 8, 1998, EAJA application and the December 7, 1998, supplemental EAJA application subject to a recalculation pursuant to Mannino, 12 Vet.App. at 244 (<HOLDING>). The appellant may file and serve on the
Holding statements: (A) holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted (B) holding that malicious prosecution plaintiff must show inter alia that criminal proceeding was initiated without probable cause (C) holding that contact list based on inter alia information that was publicly available did not qualify as trade secret (D) holding individual standing not available where inter alia there is no claim that plaintiff sustained a loss disproportionate to that sustained by the corporation (E) holding inter alia that appellant must use local cpiu where available
Output:
holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted