With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Cir.2002)(citing Lessard v. Osram Sylvania, Inc., 175 F.3d 193, 197 (1st Cir.1999)); Calero-Cerezo v. U.S. Department of Justice, 855 F.3d 6, 19 (1st Cir.2004). Such a showing gives rise to an inference the employer discriminated due to the plaintiffs disability and places upon the employer the burden of articulating a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment decision. Cumpiano v. Banco Santander P.R., 902 F.2d 148, 153 (1st Cir.1990). This entails only a burden of production, and not a burden of persuasion. The burden of proving discrimination remains with the plaintiff at all times. Texas Dep’t of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253, 256, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981). See also Dichner v. Liberty Travel, 141 F.3d 24, 29-30 (1st Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Once the employer has satisfied said

A: holding that the employers burden is one only of production inasmuch as the burden of proving an improper motive always remains with the plaintiff
B: holding that section 523a2c shifts the burden of production and not the burden of proof on the issue of intent only
C: holding that the burden is on the plaintiff
D: holding that the defendants burden at this stage is one of production not one of persuasion
A.