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. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Q: to provide Timothy with a FAPE. Members of Timothy's IEP team, who were professional educators, responsible for the creation of his IEP, observed him in the classroom environment, had adequate background, experience and training to assess his condition and to formulate program to meet his needs. They considered the opinions of Timothy's medi cal and psychological providers. They opined that a full-time dedicated one-on-one aide would deflect from the goal of promoting independence for Timothy. The IDEIA does not require school districts to consult with outside experts or to adopt their recommendations. The failure to do so does not automatically constitute a serious deficiency in the IEP. Renner v. Bd. of Educ. of the Public Sch. of the City of Ann Arbor, 185 F.3d 635 (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). Under the regulations to the IDEIA, decisions
Holding statements: (A) holding that counsel was deficient for failfing to consult or call an expert on the psychology of child sexual abuse or to educate himself sufficiently on the scientific issues (B) holding that counsel was deficient for failing to consult an expert and present expert testimony about the physiological effect of toxic chemical exposure on defendants brain (C) holding that the failure to inform the defendant of his right to a sixperson jury and the failure to consult the defendant as to his wishes was an error for which a new trial was the only remedy (D) holding that the failure to recognize every possible legal argument did not render counsels performance constitutionally deficient (E) holding that school districts failure to consult with the plaintiffs expert or to adopt the number of hours she recommended for a particular therapy did not render the iep substantively deficient
A:
(E)