1. Why did Aquino have the burden of proving that Honda’s reason for discharging him was pretext? Didn’t he already prove a prima facie case?
2. Considering the criminal charges against him were dropped, what would Aquino need to have shown in order to meet his burden that Honda’s reasons for dismissing him were pretextual?

Aquino, a man of Chinese-Filipino origin, worked on a Honda assembly line and had been suspended on numerous occasions for disciplinary violations. Upon returning from a suspension, Aquino was assigned to an engine installation station. After several instances of vandalism near his work station, Honda conducted an internal investigation and determined that Aquino had committed vehicle tampering and vandalism. Although Aquino was arrested, charges were eventually dropped due to insufficient evidence. Nonetheless, Honda terminated Aquino’s employment. Aquino filed suit claiming his termination was based on the fact that he was the only nonwhite employee assigned to the unit.