With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". because senior managers assign employees major responsibilities, performance standards, and CSFs at their discretion (id. at 15-17, 19). However, Dr. Banks concedes that evaluations and CSFs are not applied consistently between regions or between supervisors in the same regions, and that their assessments of employees are not comparable; “essentially their evaluations do not permit ‘apples to apples’ comparisons” (id. at 17-18, 27). This incomparability undermines plaintiffs claim of commonality: even if one supervisor used Allstate’s subjective employment practices “as a mask for discrimination,” that does not inexorably lead to the conclusion that any other supervisors did so. See, e.g., Morrison v. Panduit Corp., No. 03-3081, 2004 WL 3049816, at **2, 5 (7th Cir. Dec.21, 2004) (<HOLDING>). Dr. Banks’s opinion evidence does not

A: holding that evidence did not show that vice president discriminated against employee because vice president was not involved in many of the employment decisions at issue
B: holding that three municipal flow control ordinances similar to the one here at issue discriminated against interstate commerce
C: holding that a sexual assault on a female employee was of a personal nature and not directed against the employee as part of the employment relationship
D: holding white female employee lacks standing under title vii to allege injury on behalf of black applicants to employment agency who were discriminated against because of race
A.