Scott,

The UI is a bit "strange", because it guess what you are trying to do and 99% of the time it just does something else.

In your case, because the filter you look for is quite simple, (A and B and C) or (D and E) , Just do it in the XML of your analysis.

Add your 5 conditions all at once to your analysis, and then go in the "advanced" tab and edit the XML to make your condition.

The 5 filters will be contained inside a sawx:expr block with the operator "and":

<sawx:expr xsi:type="sawx:logical" op="and">
...
</sawx:expr>

Duplicate this block, remove the conditions D and E from the first, and the conditions A, B and C from the second.

<sawx:expr xsi:type="sawx:logical" op="or">
   <sawx:expr xsi:type="sawx:logical" op="and">
      <!-- A -->
      <!-- D -->
      <!-- C -->
   </sawx:expr>
   <sawx:expr xsi:type="sawx:logical" op="and">
      <!-- D -->
      <!-- E-->
   </sawx:expr>
</sawx:expr>

For this kind of work, 2 minutes editing the XML is a lot easier than trying to add the filters in the right order after your spent 30 minutes studying how the tool reacts at every single click...

It's doable via the GUI, but it does look "less clean" and it's a bit less intuitive to achieve:

These are just all equivalent from a functional point of view.

Click on the first 2 (on top) "and" to make them "or", the same on the last (bottom) "and". Then click on the last "and". Finally click on the 3 "or" that should become a "and" (the first 2 and the last one) to change them.

And you get it, but it just make you think twice when you are doing the clicking and it also look less intuitive: A and B and C == (A and B) and C == A and (B and C), but seeing A and B and C looks more natural than the other 2.