With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (1989). As discussed above, the definition of eog-nizability has the potential to become so expansive as to render peremptory challenges meaningless. However, at present, the federal circuit courts do not recognize cognizable groups based on age, occupation, or association. See, e.g., United States v. De Gross, 960 F.2d 1433, 1438 n. 8 (9th Cir.1992) (stating that an occupation-based peremptory challenge does not violate Batson because this type of discrimination does not rise to the level of an equal protection violation); Pemberthy v. Beyer, 19 F.3d 857, 870-71 n. 18 (3d Cir.1994) (noting that age-based strikes do not rise to the level of a Batson violation), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 439, 130 L.Ed.2d 350 (1994); United States v. Townsley, 856 F.2d 1189, 1190 (8th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>), cert. dismissed, 499 U.S. 944, 111 S.Ct.

A: holding that the white defendants association with a black defendant was not sufficient to give them standing to join in the black defendants batson challenge
B: holding that a white office was not similarly situated to a black officer who was charged with more offenses than the white officer
C: holding that unequivocal examples of racial animus included instances when plaintiff was instructed to keep his black ass off the phone and was called a black son of a bitch and a black motherfucker
D: holding that is not the fact that a jury is all white or all black that violates batson rather it is the racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges to strike jurors
A.