Which of the Following Did the Court Determine in In Re

Which of the following did the court determine in In re Holsinger,the case in the text in which the debtor requested a waiver of debt-counseling under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act?

A) That imminent foreclosure of real property and resultant eviction qualified as exigent circumstances entitling the debtor to a waiver of the debt-counseling requirement.
B) That credit-counseling may be waived when the debtor establishes that work obligations prevent attendance at any counseling session within 20 miles.
C) That credit-counseling may be waived when the debtor establishes that work obligations prevent attendance at any counseling session within 50 miles.
D) That credit-counseling is in effect optional and may be waived when the debtor establishes that attendance would create a hardship, for example, in regard to family matters.
E) That even imminent foreclosure of real property does not entitle a debtor to waiver when other requirements in relation to debt counseling remain unsatisfied.