Machinchick worked for PB Power for six years. He received excellent reviews. Two years after beginning work, he was promoted to vice president. Four years after his promotion, Machinchick got a new supervisor and the company adopted a new management approach. The new supervisor, Knowlton, stated his plan to "hand-pick employees whose mindset resides in the 21st Century." On April 7, 2002, Knowlton sent an e-mail in which he stated that he wanted to "strategically hire some younger engineers and designers." Two days later, Knowlton sent an e-mail to the Human Resources Department criticizing Machinchick's performance. A short time later, Machinchick, age 63, was fi red. He was told to turn over his client base to Betz, age 42. Machinchick sued PB Power, alleging it had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The trial court granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of PB Power. Machinchick appealed. How should the appellate court decide? Has Machinchick shown enough evidence of age discrimination to war rant allowing the case to be heard by a jury? Explain your decision.