The plaintiff filed a complaint with the EEOC that the defendant, an insurance company), had rejected his application for a loss control inspector job on the basis of age discrimination. The defendant had advertised the position in a local paper. The ad read, "the ideal candidate will have a college degree and two years of experience in loss control..." among other information. The company subsequently hired a 28-year-old college grad with no lass control experience. The plaintiff had 30 years of loss control experience and was over the age of 40. The company claimed that an employee with that much loss control experience would have been overqualified for the position and, in fact, would have delved too deeply into the insured's affairs and claims. Questions 1. Is this case one of disparate impact or disparate treatment? 2. What is the legal basis or provision for the alleged discrimination? 3. What would be his prima facie case? 4. Based on your answer to the second question, what defense would the defendant use? 5.If you were the judge, how would you rule in this case, and why?