With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". through the affidavits of Mark Antoine, Entergy’s labor relations coordinator, defendants deny any discrimination against plaintiff on account of his age and assert that plaintiffs circumstance was due to a reorganization and downsizing of Entergy’s overall work force. Plaintiff responds that the company picked the two oldest employees to discharge, namely plaintiff and one Sam Beavers, because of their salaries and because they were liabilities to the company’s health insurance. A plaintiff may not merely offer conclusory remarks bereft of a concrete factual basis and the requisite vigor to refute a defendant’s proffered legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for the action it took. See United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO v. University of Alabama, 599 F.2d 56, 61 (5th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>); E.E.O.C. v. Exxon Shipping Co., 745 F.2d 967,

A: holding that a nonmoving party cannot defeat a motion for summary judgment by relying on conclusory statements
B: holding affidavits based on conclusory allegations insufficient at summary judgment
C: holding that allegations against nondiverse defendants must be factual not conclusory because conclusory allegations do not state a claim
D: holding that in order to defeat successfully a motion for summary judgment more than mere allegations and conclusory statements must be offered
D.