With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". occurring after suit was filed at the end of 2003. The district court agreed and held “that the most reliable statistics are those gathered from [actual] promotion data occurring before this action was filed”, and determined that “post-suit promotion data is entitled to minimal weight.” J.A. 8986 n. 4. With the post-lawsuit data favorable to Nucor excluded from consideration, the appellants’ experts calculated the actual versus expected standard deviation based on the actual job posting and bidding data from 2001 to 2003 as - 1.48. In other words, the appellants were unable to produce statistically significant evidence of race discrimination in promotions based on actual job posting data. See Castaneda v. Partida, 430 U.S. 482, 496 n. 17, 97 S.Ct. 1272, 51 L.Ed.2d 498 (1977) (<HOLDING>); Warren v. Halstead Indus., Inc., 802 F.2d

A: holding that statistical evidence of less than two standard deviations may be relevant when corroborated by other evidence
B: recognizing that differences between the expected value and the observed number greater than two or three standard deviations are significant
C: recognizing that there are significant differences in the definition of disability under the social security and va systems
D: recognizing that a standard deviation greater than two or three excludes chance as the cause of underrepresentation
B.