With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". on appeal, and that determination that this Court will consider. 1. There is no direct evidence of pretext. The Ninth Circuit has clarified the type of evidence that will enable a retaliation claim to proceed beyond the summary judgment stage. It held that “[w]hen the plaintiff offers direct evidence of discriminatory motive, a triable issue as to the actual motivation of the employer is created even if the evidence is not substantial.” Godwin v. Hunt Wesson, Inc., 150 F.3d 1217, 1221 (1998). Direct evidence of discriminatory animus has been recognized by several circuits as “evidence which, if believed, proves the fact without inference or presumption.” Davis v. Chevron, 14 F.3d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1994); see also Spengler v. Worthington Cylinders, 615 F.3d 481, 491 (6th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); Godwin, 150 F.3d at 1222 (finding direct

A: holding that direct evidence by definition is evidence that does not require an inferential leap between fact and conclusion
B: holding that direct evidence of retaliation is lacking where the evidence if believed  would not require the conclusion that defendant unlawfully retaliated against plaintiff emphasis in original
C: holding that the admission of unlawfully seized evidence of a crime was admissible if the jury was instructed that the evidence could be considered only in assessing a defendants credibility and not for determining guilt
D: holding that evidence that would normally be admissible may be excluded if the evidence was a direct or indirect product of an unlawful search
B.