Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
defendant’s method of measuring the productivity of its sales staff singled her out and devalued her contribution. It is well-established that an employer may rely upon supervisor evaluations to assess an employee’s performance when carrying out an employment decision. Meiri v. Dacon, 759 F.2d 989, 995 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 829, 106 S.Ct. 91, 88 L.Ed.2d 74 (1985). As articulated by plaintiff, however, by considering the small, less time-consuming agreements the younger salesmen were able to obtain as equivalent to the those plaintiff sought, defendant intentionally undervalued plaintiffs work. As further evidence of the pretext of the methodology, plaintiff cites the following examples: that it was applied retroactively to diminish the value of her sales, th (2d Cir.1994) . Additionally, plaintiff denies the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that based upon discrepancies in defendants articulated basis for discrimination reasonable juror could infer that these were pretextual and developed over time to counter evidence suggesting discrimination
B. holding discrimination based on pregnancy was not sex discrimination
C. holding that allegations of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation necessarily state a claim of discrimination on the basis of sex
D. holding that a reasonable juror could not infer discrimination based on a supervisors comments that the company needed to get rid of its old fart pilots
E. holding that a reasonable juror could infer that the shifting and inconsistent explanations given by the employer at trial were pretextual developed over time to counter the evidence suggesting discrimination
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.